Again you're just making shit up. "Negligence" is a real, defined word in the legal sense, it doesn't just mean "Oops! This person died! Must be negligence!" They would have to prove that the doctor in question did something demonstrably dangerous that no other doctor would have done in order to prove negligence. And here's a crazy idea: maybe the doctor SHOULD be sued if he fucked up so badly that even other doctors are like "Dude..."
Here I'll give you an example of negligence versus not negligence, using this particular case in question!
Not negligence: The power to the hospital was shut off due to a natural disaster, the hospital's backup generator failed. The hospital tried everything they could to save the embryos but they couldn't find a way to transport the embryos to another working freezer.
Negligence: Allowing a patient to open the freezer where the embryos are stored and dropping the embryos on the ground.
Also claiming that using more than one embryo to increase the chance of success is a "wrongful act" is so laughably stupid I don't even know where to begin.
You mean this part?
Who, in your shit eating world, would be the "personal representative" of the embryo if the parents decide not to sue?if the father and mother are both dead or if they decline to commence the action, or fail to do so, within six months from the death of the minor, the personal representative of the minor may commence an action.
Look, Clyder, I know you're a troll who has been trolling these forums for well over a decade now, but isn't it time you stopped spreading obvious fake news in a sad and pathetic attempt to make yourself sound smart?