Understand Your Rights. Solve Your Legal Problems
For Los Angeles couple Margarita Komarova and Colin McDarmont, IVF was supposed to be the start of a family. Instead, it became a legal and emotional ordeal that no one preparing for parenthood ever expects.
The pair are now suing U.S. medical supplier CooperSurgical, alleging the company’s negligence destroyed their embryos — and possibly their final chance to have biological children.
The couple underwent IVF in November 2023, rejoicing when six embryos were successfully fertilised. But just a week later, they received the devastating call: none of the embryos had developed enough for transfer.
“We were devastated,” said Komarova, 41. “We thought we’d done everything right before the retrieval.”
The embryos were quickly discarded, leaving the couple heartbroken after months of careful preparation — from strict diets to acupuncture and yoga.
Three weeks later came the shocking revelation: their clinic notified them of a problem with the IVF culture media, the fluid that sustains embryos in early development. The batch, made by CooperSurgical, was missing magnesium — a mineral essential for cell growth and division.
In January 2024, the company confirmed the error and issued a recall for three magnesium-deficient batches. But for Komarova and McDarmont, the damage had already been done.
The couple’s lawsuit, filed in Bridgeport, Connecticut (where CooperSurgical is based), accuses the company of gross negligence and reckless disregard. Their complaint states that CooperSurgical failed to properly test and monitor its media, leading to the destruction of viable embryos and inflicting emotional and financial damage.
“We’re hoping this forces them to provide answers — and real safeguards to prevent this from happening again,” McDarmont said.
Komarova, who had dreamed of a large family since childhood, spent tens of thousands of dollars on IVF treatments since marrying McDarmont in 2020. The failed cycle left her physically drained and emotionally broken.
“It’s not something where you can just jump back in and do another one,” she explained. “Your body needs time to recover — and so does your mind.”
The couple are seeking at least $15,000 in damages, though their true loss, they say, is far greater.
Across the Atlantic, Atomic Kitten star Liz McClarnon, 44, recently shared her own bittersweet IVF story — one that ended in joy but underscored how fragile the process can be.
After two decades of fertility struggles and multiple failed cycles, Liz welcomed her first child this year with husband Peter Cho, describing her labour as “early and scary” but ultimately life-changing.
“After years of painful IVF and dark times, we finally have our miracle,” she said.
Her openness has helped destigmatize infertility and IVF across the UK. But Liz’s journey also shines a light on how fertility treatment errors — like those faced by Komarova and McDarmont — can have devastating emotional and legal consequences.
While Liz’s success story embodies hope, the Los Angeles case exposes the systemic vulnerabilities in fertility medicine worldwide — from lab standards to consent protocols and legal accountability.
For anyone considering or undergoing IVF — in the U.S. or the U.K. — the Komarova case raises pressing legal questions: Who is responsible when embryos are destroyed? What rights do patients have if something goes wrong?
In U.S. law, CooperSurgical could face product liability claims if the defective media is proven unsafe or improperly manufactured. If the error occurred after testing or during lab use, medical negligence could apply to the fertility clinic itself.
In the U.K., similar protections fall under the Consumer Protection Act 1987 and Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act, both ensuring medical suppliers and clinics maintain strict safety standards.
Key takeaway: IVF patients are legally entitled to expect “reasonable skill and care” from both clinics and manufacturers — including safe products and accurate lab procedures.
Under the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008, embryos belong jointly to both contributors. If negligence destroys embryos, couples may claim compensation for emotional distress, financial loss, or breach of duty — though courts handle such claims cautiously, given the complexity of reproductive ethics.
Courts increasingly recognise the emotional trauma caused by fertility negligence. In both U.S. and U.K. precedents, claimants have been awarded damages for psychological distress where embryos were lost or mishandled.
Practical tip: Patients should request full documentation of every IVF stage, from consent forms to batch numbers. If an error occurs, these records become vital evidence in proving negligence.
Experts say both countries’ fertility laws lag behind modern science. New technology, from genetic screening to embryo freezing, raises questions about liability, storage limits, and informed consent.
Fertility specialist Professor Geeta Nargund told Sky News:
“Ideally, if a woman is ready for a child, she should start trying by the time she is 30… because as a woman gets older, her fertility declines sharply.”
Her warning underscores the urgency of improving access, safety, and transparency in fertility care — before time, or legal loopholes, rob hopeful parents of their dreams.
Whether it’s Liz McClarnon in the U.K. or Komarova and McDarmont in California, the lesson is the same: IVF is not just about science. It’s about trust — in doctors, in law, and in the system meant to protect life at its most fragile stage.
As the lawsuit continues, it has already ignited a global conversation about accountability in fertility medicine — one that’s long overdue.
