In vitro fertilization (IVF) is a medical process used to help individuals or couples conceive a child when natural conception is difficult or not possible.

The remaining embryos may be frozen for future use, allowing for additional attempts at pregnancy without repeating the entire process.

In 2020, a patient at the Center for Reproductive Medicine in Mobile, Alabama improperly accessed the cryogenic freezer where frozen embryos were stored, removing and dropping them on the floor after their hands suffered from cold burns.

The trial court granted those motions, explaining its view that "[t]he cryopreserved, in vitro embryos involved in this case did not fit within the statutory definition of 'person'" or "'child,'" and held that their loss did not accrue a cause of action for wrongful death.

[12][13][14][15] Parker stated: In summary, the theologically based view of the sanctity of life adopted by the People of Alabama encompasses the following: (1) God made every person in His image; (2) each person therefore has a value that far exceeds the ability of human beings to calculate; and (3) human life cannot be wrongfully destroyed without incurring the wrath of a holy God, who views the destruction of His image as an affront to Himself.

[20][21] On February 29, 2024, the two houses of the Alabama legislature passed similar bills, stating "no action, suit, or criminal prosecution for the damage to or death of an embryo shall be brought or maintained against any individual or entity when providing or receiving goods or services related to in vitro fertilization.

"[28][4] Some members of the Republican party, already trying to push their stance on abortion to the background so as to draw votes from women and swing voters, were critical of the Alabama Supreme Court decision since it left no carve out to protect IVF.

[27] Other Republican leaders in the U.S. House of Representatives praised the decision, having previously backed a bill that would codify that life begins at conception.

[31] Chief Justice Tom Parker's concurring opinion rested heavily on Christian principles, leading to concern about his overall approach to judiciary duties.

"[32] Parker's comments, in addition to his judicial opinion, have led to concern about the push of Christian nationalism by conservative politicians and the Republican party, and the attempted weakening of the separation of church and state.