Inside the IVF Testing Debate

Each year, tens of thousands of people in the U.S. try to conceive using in vitro fertilization (IVF), a process through which eggs are fertilized in a lab, then transferred to the patient's uterus. Even though IVF has become relatively common, it’s not a sure bet: About 70% of people younger than 35 who were first-time IVF patients in 2019 and used their own eggs had a baby within two years, according to a fertility industry report. Success rates decline as patients get older.

Given the physical, financial, and emotional tolls of failed cycles, researchers around the world are working to make IVF more effective. “In medicine, nobody can guarantee success,” says Dr. Zev Williams, chief of reproductive endocrinology and infertility at Columbia University Irving Medical Center. “The question is, how close can we get?”

Follow us:

[gendoll]

This reminds me of people “pure” breeding dogs. Even though there are plenty of dogs that already need homes, instead ppl pay ridiculous amounts of money to have a dog they have their eyes set on (usually for pretentious reasons). And breeders will gladly take their money.

[e_]

This video discussed pre-implantation genetic testing that can accompany the in vitro fertilization process. This process tests mainly for aneuploidies which have the potential to be deadly genetic mutations. This video clearly discusses that pre-implantation testing has a high index for false positives. When considering pre-implantation testing, it is critical to consider it through an ethical perspective.
Physicians have fiduciary duty to their patients. If a physician is testing an embryo for aneuploidies, but knows that these tests have a high index for false positives, does passing the information to the patient that the embryo has abnormalities categorize as relying false information? If a patient perceives the information as true and is unaware of the high index for false positives, this has a high potential to fracture the trust a patient has towards their physician. Pre-implantation genetic testing has the potential to breach this bond of trust that patients have in doctors.
Another ethical consideration needing to be pondered with pre-implantation genetic testing is the concept of autonomy. Autonomy is the concept of giving a patient the freedom to make decisions. If pre-implantation genetic testing is accessible and possible, is it withholding a patient of the right to autonomy through not allowing them to proceed with pre-implantation genetic testing?
In conclusion, I consider it to be a physicians responsibility to ensure that their patient is given autonomy through allowing them to decline or chose to proceed with pre-implantation genetic testing. I also consider it critical that physicians educate their patient on the high index of false positives associated with pre-implantation testing, to minimize the risk of breaching the bond of trust their patients have for them.
With these two considerations, I believe that pre-implantation genetic testing for aneuploidy should be made available to all patients proceeding with in vitro fertilization.

[SayidBirmajer-pqxy]

Could abnormal embryos develop into babies (regardless of potential disabilities or birth defects) if they were transferred? Does anyone know? Thanks.

[JC-jbmn]

I'm glad there's males on this Earth if not we won't be able to procreate. Thank you God for creating the man and my husband. 😊