Bombay High Court Questions Rationale Behind IVF Age Limit
The Bombay High Court is scrutinizing the central government’s age restrictions for In Vitro Fertilisation (IVF) treatment, questioning the underlying justification for the stipulated limits. The court’s inquiry comes as it hears a petition from a couple seeking to continue IVF treatment despite the husband exceeding the statutory age of 55 in October.
The case highlights a growing debate surrounding reproductive rights and the evolving landscape of assisted reproductive technologies. The Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act, 2021, currently sets the age limit at 50 for women and 55 for men seeking IVF.
A division bench comprised of justices Riyaz Chagla and Farhan Dubash directed the couple to revise their petition, explicitly stating whether they intend to proceed with the husband’s sperm or consider utilizing a donor. This request for clarity underscores the court’s need to fully understand the couple’s intentions before making a ruling.
The couple, married since December 2018, initiated IVF treatment in 2020 after facing difficulties conceiving naturally. Following several unsuccessful attempts, their physician advised them to seek legal recourse due to the husband’s age. The petition argues that denying them treatment solely based on age is unjust, particularly given the husband’s documented medical fitness.
The couple’s legal team cited a similar case decided by the Calcutta High Court, which permitted IVF using donated gametes. They contend that because their treatment began before the 2021 Act was enacted, the new regulations should not impede their progress “in the interest of justice.” They further assert that individuals should not be arbitrarily barred from parenthood based on age alone, especially when a medical professional confirms their ability to conceive.
During Wednesday’s hearing, the state government indicated it had no objections to interfering in the case but maintained the importance of upholding the established age limit. When the couple indicated they were undecided on whether to use a donor, the court emphasized the necessity of full transparency. “Such transparency is necessary at this stage,” the court reportedly remarked, before ordering the petition’s amendment within one week.
The court’s questioning of the age limit’s rationale signals a potential willingness to consider exceptions to the current regulations. The outcome of this case could have significant implications for other couples facing similar circumstances and may prompt a broader review of the IVF age restrictions in India.
Related reading
- The Antideficiency Act, Explained: The Law Behind Every Shutdown (daybreakwire.com)
