The fact that IVF clinics and abortion clinics and abortion hospitals are not found in all states requires a look at the interference of commerce across state lines. Additionally, the 'idea' that a government can dictate a physician's practice is out of the question. If an IVF phyisican needs to fertilize all the ovums obtained from a consenting woman for THE BEST outcome for a fertilized ovum leading to a pregnancy than that is the PROCEDURE the physician has to follow and what he is paid for. To impurdently place all the ovums in a women seeking to give birth or a surrogate mother to give birth for another person is simply malpractice while endangering the women and the perspective 'term' pregnancy. That has already been determined by peer review of a physican that allowed fanaticism by his patient into his practice, ie: Octomom.The issue has to be removed from 'the religious rhelm' in the USA because there is no and there never shall be an official religion of the USA. Additionally, the relationship between physician and persepctive parent or one of abortion where the 'opportunity' to parent is terminated is a FINANCIAL CONTRACT. The USA first and foremost has defined itself as a democracy whereby contract law exists freely between citizens. If a contract for services is engaged between a physician and a woman or person, the state has no right to interfere with that contract. IVF is a very expensive contract. Abortion less so. But, none the less each PROCEDURE is a contract between individuals that requires an exchange of money and/or an understanding of exchange of services if there is any research being conducted. Either way this is directly related to The Commerce Clause. It would get really interesting if the IVF Clinic were on a floating barge in USA waters as the court already applied the Commerce Clause to that capacity.
