RESUMO
This Viewpoint breaks down the myriad ways the Alabama Supreme Court decision to declare frozen embryos as legal equivalents to children harms the health of mothers and fetuses, limits reproductive decision-making based on genetics and out-of-reach costs, and impedes research.
Assuntos
Regulamentação Governamental , Jurisprudência , Medicina Reprodutiva , Governo Estadual , Feminino , Humanos , Gravidez , Aborto Legal/legislação & jurisprudência , Alabama , Medicina Reprodutiva/legislação & jurisprudência , Estados UnidosRESUMO
PURPOSE: To evaluate live birth rates (LBRs) for in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles with ≤5 follicles at trigger, with the goal of helping patients with low follicle counts decide whether to proceed to retrieval. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study from an urban, university-affiliated fertility center. All IVF cycles that yielded <10 oocytes between 2016 and 2020 were reviewed. Cycles were included if <5 follicles measuring >14 mm were verified on trigger day. The primary outcome was LBR per retrieval after fresh or frozen transfer. Secondary outcomes were number of oocytes, mature oocytes, 2-pronuclear zygotes (2-PNs), blastocysts for transfer/biopsy, and euploid blastocysts (if preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) was used). RESULTS: 1502 cycles (900 with PGT-A) from 972 patients were included. Mean number of oocytes, mature oocytes, 2-PNs, blastocysts for transfer/biopsy, and euploid blastocysts differed by follicle number (p < 0.001). Across all age groups, there were differences in LBR associated with follicle number (p < 0.001). However, within age groups, not all results were significant. For example, for patients <35 years, LBR did not differ by follicle number and among patients 35-37 years; LBR with two or three follicles was lower than with five (p < 0.02). LBR for patients 35-40 years was <20% with 1-3 follicles and 25-40% with 4-5 follicles. LBR for patients >41 years was <5% with 1-3 follicles and <15% with 4-5 follicles. CONCLUSION: As expected, LBR is higher with more follicles. Providing patients with <5 follicles with specific data can help them weigh the emotional, physical, and financial costs of retrieval.
Assuntos
Coeficiente de Natalidade , Indução da Ovulação , Feminino , Humanos , Gravidez , Estudos Retrospectivos , Indução da Ovulação/métodos , Fertilização in vitro/métodos , Folículo Ovariano , Nascido Vivo/epidemiologia , Taxa de GravidezRESUMO
IMPORTANCE: Genetic testing of gamete donors is becoming increasingly comprehensive and now often includes expanded carrier screening. Some argue that testing has gone too far, whereas others propose that testing is not extensive enough. Thinking critically about how much genetic testing is appropriate for gamete donors is crucial for ensuring that market forces alone do not determine the level of testing that is performed. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this paper is to highlight contradictions in the current approach toward genetic testing of gamete donors and to suggest that we either embrace the value of preventing the birth of children with hereditary diseases and do so in a logical and consistent manner or consider reducing our level of genetic testing for gamete donors. EVIDENCE REVIEW: The Food and Drug Administration requires screening for infectious diseases and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine recommends screening for a small number of common recessive conditions. However, private donor banks are increasingly performing karyotype testing and expanded carrier screening. FINDINGS: There are 2 major inconsistencies in our current approach to genetic testing of gamete donors: (1) if genetic information is valued by gamete recipients, why should testing stop with recessive conditions, and not expand to dominant conditions or even polygenic risk scoring? (2) Why should gamete donors be asked to undergo testing that may or may not be reciprocated by gamete recipients? Addressing these inconsistencies requires us to consider the ultimate goal of testing gamete donors' genes. We argue that the present, default goal is empowerment of gamete recipients, whereas an alternative and more laudable mission is to avoid preventable, heritable disease in offspring. However, the latter brings its own ethical and practical challenges, including the issue of which diseases are worth preventing. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: A more comprehensive and well-reasoned approach to genetic testing of gamete donors is needed. Otherwise, testing will continue to be haphazard and guided by the free market, rather than deeper societal values.
Assuntos
Testes Genéticos , Doação de Oócitos , Criança , Humanos , Células Germinativas , Doadores de TecidosRESUMO
Public attention has been drawn recently to the commercial availability of noninvasive prenatal screening for rare genetic conditions, despite estimates that the positive predictive value of such tests is low. Many have focused on the importance of educating patients on the difference between screening and diagnostic testing so that they are adequately prepared for the possibility of a false-positive result. Even so, we question whether expanded noninvasive prenatal screening is ready to be used a screening tool. We argue that established public health criteria for evaluating the risks and benefits of a screening tool should be applied to expanded noninvasive prenatal screening. If a test fails to meet accepted standards, governmental agencies should consider regulating the accuracy and promotional claims of commercially available tests.
Assuntos
Síndrome de Down , Teste Pré-Natal não Invasivo , Síndrome de Down/diagnóstico , Feminino , Testes Genéticos , Humanos , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Gravidez , Diagnóstico Pré-NatalRESUMO
Prenatal genetic testing is becoming available for an increasingly broad set of diseases, and it is only a matter of time before parents can choose to test for hundreds, if not thousands, of genetic conditions in their fetuses. Should access to certain kinds of fetal genetic information be limited, and if so, on what basis? We evaluate a range of considerations including reproductive autonomy, parental rights, disability rights, and the rights and interests of the fetus as a potential future child. We conclude that parents should be able to access information that could be useful during pregnancy, but that testing for non-medical information should be limited. Next, we argue that the government lacks a compelling state interest in regulating prenatal genetic testing and propose that regulation should occur through medical professional organizations. Finally, we present a framework for determining what testing physicians should recommend, offer neutrally, or not offer at all.
Assuntos
Feto , Diagnóstico Pré-Natal , Feminino , Testes Genéticos , Humanos , Pais , GravidezAssuntos
Aborto Legal/legislação & jurisprudência , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Eletivos , Política de Saúde , Acessibilidade aos Serviços de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Governo Estadual , COVID-19 , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Eletivos/legislação & jurisprudência , Feminino , Política de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudência , Humanos , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Serviços de Saúde Reprodutiva/legislação & jurisprudência , Serviços de Saúde Reprodutiva/provisão & distribuição , Estados UnidosRESUMO
This paper reviews common advertising claims by egg freezing companies and evaluates the medical evidence behind those claims. It then surveys legal standards for truth in advertising, including FTC and FDA regulations and the First Amendment right to free speech. Professional standards for medical advertising, such as guidelines published by the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM), the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), and the American Medical Association (AMA), are also summarized. A number of claims, many of which relate to the targeting of younger women for eOC, are found to breach legal and ethical standards for truth in advertising. The ethical implications of misleading advertising claims are also discussed, and the central narrative woven by OC ads - that egg freezing is empowering to women - is examined. The paper concludes that a more balanced approach to the risks and benefits of OC is necessary to truly respect women's autonomy. Moreover, justice requires us to look beyond a medical procedure accessible only to a minority of women in order to address inequities in the workplace.
Assuntos
Publicidade/ética , Publicidade/legislação & jurisprudência , Criopreservação , Óvulo , Publicidade/normas , Feminino , Regulamentação Governamental , Guias como Assunto , Humanos , Sociedades Médicas , Estados Unidos , United States Federal Trade Commission , United States Food and Drug AdministrationRESUMO
When the HPV vaccine was released over a decade ago, there was intense opposition to mandating the vaccine, including among bioethics and legal scholars. Some of the original concerns are now obsolete, while other objections continue to present an obstacle to mandating the vaccine. This essay responds to earlier critiques of mandatory HPV vaccination and offers a series of arguments in support of a vaccine mandate. The first section briefly addresses initial concerns that are no longer relevant. The second section makes the ethical case for mandating HPV vaccination, based on three principles: 1) the best interests of children, 2) solidarity, and 3) health equity. The final section addresses concerns related to implementation of the vaccine, including the validity of linking vaccination to school entry. The essay concludes that we have a moral imperative to protect children from the leading cause of cervical cancer, and that mandating HPV vaccination is the best way to ensure that children of all backgrounds receive the vaccine before they have been exposed to the virus.
Assuntos
Programas Obrigatórios/ética , Vacinas contra Papillomavirus , Feminino , Equidade em Saúde , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Neoplasias do Colo do Útero/prevenção & controle , Neoplasias do Colo do Útero/virologiaAssuntos
Obtenção de Tecidos e Órgãos , Útero , Morte , Feminino , Humanos , Doadores Vivos , Alocação de RecursosRESUMO
Since the human genome was decoded, great emphasis has been placed on the unique, personal nature of the genome, along with the benefits that personalized medicine can bring to individuals and the importance of safeguarding genetic privacy. As a result, an equally important aspect of the human genome - its common nature - has been underappreciated and underrepresented in the ethics literature and policy dialogue surrounding genetics and genomics. This article will argue that, just as the personal nature of the genome has been used to reinforce individual rights and justify important privacy protections, so too the common nature of the genome can be employed to support protections of the genome at a population level and policies designed to promote the public's wellbeing. In order for public health officials to have the authority to develop genetics policies for the sake of the public good, the genome must have not only a common, but also a public, dimension. This article contends that DNA carries a public dimension through the use of two conceptual frameworks: the common heritage (CH) framework and the common resource (CR) framework. Both frameworks establish a public interest in the human genome, but the CH framework can be used to justify policies aimed at preserving and protecting the genome, while the CR framework can be employed to justify policies for utilizing the genome for the public benefit. A variety of possible policy implications are discussed, with special attention paid to the use of large-scale genomics databases for public health research.
Assuntos
Privacidade Genética , Genoma Humano , Genômica/ética , Humanos , Privacidade , Saúde PúblicaRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Given public demand for genetic information, the potential to perform prenatal whole-genome sequencing (PWGS) non-invasively in the future, and decreasing costs of whole-genome sequencing, it is likely that OB/GYN practice will include PWGS. The goal of this project was to explore OB/GYNs' views on the ethical issues surrounding PWGS and their preparedness for counseling patients on its use. METHODS: A national survey was administered to 2500 members of American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. RESULTS: A total of 1114 respondents completed the survey (response rate = 45%). OB/GYNs are most concerned with ordering non-medical fetal genetic information, are worried about increasing parental anxiety, and feel it is appropriate to be directive when counseling parents about PWGS. Furthermore, most OB/GYNs have limited knowledge of genetics, rely heavily on genetic counselors and would like more guidance regarding the clinical adoption of PWGS. CONCLUSION: OB/GYNs do not completely accept or reject PWGS, but a substantial number have significant ethical and practical concerns. They are most concerned with issues that will directly affect their practices and interactions with patients, such as increasing parental anxiety and costs of care. Professional guidance would be instrumental in directing the adoption of PWGS and alleviating the ethical burden posed by PWGS on individual OB/GYNs. Published 2016. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.
Assuntos
Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , Testes Genéticos/ética , Ginecologia/ética , Obstetrícia/ética , Diagnóstico Pré-Natal/métodos , Análise de Sequência de DNA/ética , Ética , Feminino , Aconselhamento Genético/psicologia , Testes Genéticos/métodos , Humanos , Masculino , Médicos/ética , Médicos/psicologia , Padrões de Prática Médica/ética , Gravidez , Inquéritos e Questionários , Estados UnidosRESUMO
In September 2014, a healthy male child was born in Sweden following a successful uterine transplantation (UTx). The event brought hope to many women without functional uteruses around the world. Having a child with a transplanted uterus is now possible, and as knowledge of the procedure proliferates and interest in UTx grows, it is important to begin thinking about how a scarce supply of uteruses will be allocated. This article represents a first discussion of the range of factors that must be considered in answering the allocation question. The primary issues addressed are (1) the motivation to seek treatment, (2) allocation by age, (3) child-rearing capacity, and (4) the amount of infertility treatment required. A set of eligibility and ranking criteria are presented. These criteria are not exhaustive but are intended to spark discussion about how uteruses can be allocated in a just manner.
Assuntos
Infertilidade Feminina/terapia , Seleção de Pacientes/ética , Útero/transplante , Feminino , Humanos , Transplante de Órgãos/éticaRESUMO
Unlike many European nations, the USA has no regulations concerning the use of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), a technique employed during some fertility treatments to select embryos based on their genes. As such, PGD can and is used for a variety of controversial purposes, including sex selection, selection for children with disabilities such as deafness, and selection for 'saviour siblings' who can serve as tissue donors for sick relatives. The lack of regulation, which is due to particular features of the US political and economic landscape, has ethical and practical implications for patients seeking PGD around the world. This paper contrasts the absence of PGD oversight in the USA with existing PGD policies in Switzerland, Italy, France and the UK. The primary reasons why PGD is not regulated in the USA are addressed, with consideration of factors such as funding for assisted reproductive technology treatmemt and the proximity of PGD to the contentious abortion debate. The obstacles that would need to be overcome in the USA for PGD to be regulated in the future are outlined. Then, the significance of the current divergence in PGD policy for patients around the world are discussed. Regulatory differences create opportunities for reproductive tourism, which result in legal, health and moral challenges. The paper concludes with comments on the need for policymakers around the world to balance respect for the characters and constitutions of their individual countries with appreciation of the needs of infertile patients across the globe.