DES MOINES — Tuesday night, the Iowa Supreme Court heard arguments that will ultimately determine if a case — alleging a former University of Iowa Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology chair non-consensually inseminated patients with his own sperm — goes to trial.
Members of the Iowa Supreme Court sat tucked away inside the Iowa Judicial Branch Building’s limestone and granite exterior overlooking downtown Des Moines and the reflective shine from Iowa’s State Capitol building, listening to the facts of the case.
Dr. John H. Randall headed the UI OB-GYN department from April 1952 until he died in April 1959. Over that seven year period, court documents state Randall provided Donna and Bert Junior Miller fertility treatment, resulting in the birth of three children in 1954, 1956, and 1958.
Decades later, what was thought to be seemingly standard fertility treatment from Randall appears to have been anything but. Thanks to the emergence of publicly available DNA testing introduced by Ancestry.com in 2012, members of the Miller family discovered an anomaly while searching their records on the popular genealogical website that can assist families with tracing their individual family trees.
Ancestry.com uses DNA testing and historical records to provide a myriad of family tracing services for users, ranging from geographic origins to familial lineage.
By just spitting in a tube and paying a $99 fee, individuals are able to test their DNA against millions of collected samples.
According to court documents filed in February 2024, Bert Jay Miller and Nancy Duffner — Donna Miller’s two older children — are alleging their mother’s fertility doctor, John H. Randall, is their biological father based on conclusions drawn from DNA testing conducted via Ancestry.com.
Randy Miller, the youngest of the three, verified that Bert Junior Miller was his biological father, according to court documents.
“At no time during Donna Miller’s life did she indicate to her three children their biological father was anyone other than her husband, Bert Junior Miller,” documents read.
Both Bert Jay Miller and Duffner are suing the state for compensatory damages, statutory damages amounting to $200,000, court costs, and attorney fees.
Bert Jay Miller and Duffner are not the only parties filing charges against the State of Iowa regarding the alleged non-consensual insemination of patients by Randall.
Two separate lawsuits — Stoughton vs. the State of Iowa and Bright vs. the State of Iowa — have also been filed.
The facts of the Stoughton case are similar with that of Bert Jay Miller and Duffner. According to court documents, Ronald Stoughton, born in 1943, and Rebecca Myers, born in 1948, were children of Marlys Stoughton. Documents state Randall assisted the family with fertility treatment, and the two children later learned via Ancestry.com that Randall was allegedly their biological father.
Randall also delivered Myers and signed her birth certificate as the attending physician, court documents show.
Elizabeth Bright, born in 1958, also filed a case against the state after discovering through Ancestry.com that her parents’ artificial insemination procedure allegedly used Randall’s sperm, making Bright his biological daughter.
These cases, however, may never see the courtroom, barring a decision from the Iowa Supreme Court. Michael Biderman and Karen Lorenzen with the firm Hayes Lorenzen Biderman Lawyers PLC are co-counsels for the Millers. The issue before the appellate court is whether Iowa law prohibiting fertility fraud can be applied post facto, or retroactively.
The revelation that a fertility doctor may have had a role in inseminating their own patients without consent has precedent.
According to Jody Madeira, a professor of law at Indiana University Bloomington who is familiar with the cases brought before the Iowa Supreme Court Tuesday night, said affordable, direct-to-consumer genetic testing has served as a catalyst to bring cases of illicit insemination into light.
A few high profile cases in the 2010s thrust the issue into the public sphere. One such case concerned Donald Cline, a doctor from Indianapolis who was revealed to have fathered nearly 100 biological children via artificial insemination without consent from the mothers.
Amid nationwide discussion surrounding fertility fraud and issues of informed consent, the Iowa legislature took action.
According to Iowa Code Section 714I, dubbed the Fraud in Assisted Reproduction Act, a health care professional or health facility shall not use human reproductive material “other than that to which the patient expressly consented in writing.”
The legislation introducing Iowa Code Section 714I was led by Sen. Annette Sweeney, R-Buckeye, and Rep. Megan Jones, R-Sioux Rapids, who acted as floor managers for the bill. Sweeney was not immediately available for comment.
Jones provided a comment via email to The Daily Iowan, outlining her involvement with the passage of FARA.
“I was assigned to floor manage this bill, so this wasn’t a passion of mine heading into session. However, I was happy to help and learn more about the complicated issues these families are facing,” the email read. “Women and families deserve to know who they are making a baby with — it is as simple as that: consent.”
The Fraud in Assisted Reproduction Act was passed in 2022, leading to questions regarding the legitimacy of trying cases in retrospect — especially if key members of the case are now deceased, as is the case with Randall.
According to court documents, the State of Iowa argues the law should not be applied for previous cases, as Iowa Code Section 4.5 explicitly reads, “A statute is presumed to be prospective in its operation unless expressly made retrospective.”
The State’s brief in support of the motion to dismiss the Miller case also argued that opening the door for past cases would require providers to “face the specter of civil suit arising out of medical services for not just the lifetime of the patient, but the lifetimes of any children born from the fertility services.”
Madeira, however, said there has been some shifts regarding what laws can and cannot be applied retroactively.
“You could actually change the common law and add a new common law cause of action that is retroactive, especially if there was a basis that it did not create new conduct or totally contravene understandings of conduct that existed,” Madeira said.
Madeira also said because laws relating to reproductive fraud are passed to fill gaps in existing codes, she does not see qualms with applying this genre of legislation to previous cases compared to legislation that would entirely upend expectations and understandings of proper behavior.
“There are some states that have started to crack down and impose this ex post facto rule civilly as well,” she said.
UIHC public relations manager Laura Shoemaker provided a statement via email to The Daily Iowan Tuesday morning, prior to oral arguments.
“UI Health Care does not comment on pending litigation,” the statement reads. “We appreciate the district court’s dismissal of these cases, and we will urge the Iowa Supreme Court to uphold its ruling.”
The Iowa Supreme Court releases decisions on a weekly basis, though it has not yet been announced when the decision pertaining to Tuesday night’s hearing will be released.
Visit dailyiowan.com for coverage from the Iowa Supreme Court oral arguments.