Explore the vast range of titles available.

Assisted reproduction, with its test tubes, injections, and gamete donors, raises concerns about the nature of life and kinship. Yet these concerns do not take the same shape around the world. In this innovative ethnography of in vitro fertilization in Ecuador, Elizabeth F.S. Roberts explores how reproduction by way of biotechnological assistance is not only accepted but embraced despite widespread poverty and condemnation from the Catholic Church. Roberts' intimate portrait of IVF practitioners and their patients reveals how technological intervention is folded into an Andean understanding of reproduction as always assisted, whether through kin or God. She argues that the Ecuadorian incarnation of reproductive technology is less about a national desire for modernity than it is a product of colonial racial history, Catholic practice, and kinship configurations. God's Laboratory offers a grounded introduction to critical debates in medical anthropology and science studies, as well as a nuanced ethnography of the interplay between science, religion, race and history in the formation of Andean families.

This report is an ethical analysis based on both facts and values. In in vitro fertilization (IVF), there is an intricate interaction between rapid scientific development and changing societal values. In most countries, the ethical discussion is no longer on whether or not IVF in itself is ethically justifiable. Therefore, in this review, I discuss other ethical aspects that have emerged since IVF was first introduced, such as upper age limits, 'ownership' of gametes and embryos, IVF in single women and same-sex couples, preimplantatory genetic testing, social egg freezing, commercialization, public funding, and prioritization of IVF. Despite secularization, since religion still plays an important role in regulation and practices of IVF in many countries, positions on IVF among the world religions are summarized. Decision-making concerning IVF cannot be based only on clinical and economic considerations; these cannot be disentangled from ethical principles. Many concerns regarding the costs, effects, and safety of IVF subtly transcend into more complex questions about what it means to society to bear and give birth to children.

In late 2012, the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) and the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART) announced that they would no longer consider oocyte cryopreservation (i.e., egg freezing) to be experimental. In their joint practice guideline, published in early 2013,1 the ASRM and SART specifically cautioned against the use of egg freezing as a guard against age-related fertility decline, owing to limited data about the safety, efficacy, cost-effectiveness and emotional risks of egg freezing for healthy women of reproductive age. In 2014, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) endorsed the ASRM-SART guideline. Notwithstanding these cautions, the use of social egg freezing (i.e., nonmedical egg freezing) is increasing in the United States. This increase has been linked to a number of complex and interrelated reasons for delayed childbearing, including personal, professional, financial and psychological factors.2 Recent media attention has contributed to the increasing public awareness of egg freezing in Canada. Consider, for example, media interest in announcements by Facebook and Apple that they would provide limited insurance coverage for the cost of egg freezing as an employee benefit.4 With growing public awareness of social egg freezing, Canadian women may increasingly approach physicians in search of information and advice about the procedure. Family physicians are uniquely positioned at the front lines of medical care to provide information to women who ask about egg freezing. This paper outlines medical, financial and societal implications of social egg freezing that are relevant in providing accurate and balanced information for such discussions. Egg freezing is a process that involves the hormonal stimulation of the ovaries, followed by transvaginal retrieval and subsequent freezing and storage of a woman's viable eggs.1 Although egg freezing can occur using slow-freezing or vitrification (flash-freezing) protocols, the latter technology has increased oocyte survival post-thaw and improved pregnancy rates,1,5 and is the method recommended by the relevant professional medical associations. Vitrification involves the use of cryoprotectants and ultrarapid cooling in an effort to solidify the cell to avoid the formation of ice crystals. The ASRM-SART practice guideline estimates that the survival rate of oocytes after vitrification and thawing is 90%-97%, the fertilization rate is 71%-79% and the implantation rate is 17%-41%. The clinical pregnancy rate per vitrified and thawed oocyte is 4.5%-12%.1 However, it should be noted that these data are generally derived from oocytes obtained from women less than 30 years of age. Clinical pregnancy rates decline with advanced maternal age at the time of freezing.1 Furthermore, the ASRM estimates that the live birth rate is 2%-12% for women under 38 years of age.6 Studies examining the success rates of social egg freezing remain limited, and egg freezing does not guarantee a successful pregnancy or live birth.

The advent of in vitro fertilization (IVF) in animals and humans implies an extraordinary change in the environment where the beginning of a new organism takes place. In mammals fertilization occurs in the maternal oviduct, where there are unique conditions for guaranteeing the encounter of the gametes and the first stages of development of the embryo and thus its future. During this period a major epigenetic reprogramming takes place that is crucial for the normal fate of the embryo. This epigenetic reprogramming is very vulnerable to changes in environmental conditions such as the ones implied in IVF, including in vitro culture, nutrition, light, temperature, oxygen tension, embryo-maternal signaling, and the general absence of protection against foreign elements that could affect the stability of this process. The objective of this review is to update the impact of the various conditions inherent in the use of IVF on the epigenetic profile and outcomes of mammalian embryos, including superovulation, IVF technique, embryo culture and manipulation and absence of embryo-maternal signaling. It also covers the possible transgenerational inheritance of the epigenetic alterations associated with assisted reproductive technologies (ART), including its phenotypic consequences as is in the case of the large offspring syndrome (LOS). Finally, the important scientific and bioethical implications of the results found in animals are discussed in terms of the ART in humans.

Within feminist literature from the early 1970s to this day, assisted reproductive technologies have been largely known to divide, replace or eliminate biological motherhood. For example, while in the past biological motherhood was considered a continuous experience, in vitro fertilisation (IVF) and IVF using egg donation allowed a split between two biological mothers, one providing eggs (genetic mother) and the other one gestation (gestational mother). This split was considered irreparable: the genetic mother could not be also gestational, and vice versa. On the contrary, this paper aims to show that assisted reproductive technologies may also have a constructive potential towards biological motherhood(s). To explain how it could be possible, two existing techniques are explored: the first is maternal spindle transfer, which allows a double genetic motherhood; the second is reciprocal effortless IVF, which supposedly enables a double gestational motherhood. While in the first part, these techniques are examined singularly, in the second part a feasible combination of them is speculated. The idea is that assisted reproductive technologies could ‘recombine’ genetic and gestational motherhood in two figures that include both, namely in two ‘complete’ biological mothers, both genetic and gestational.

In this article, we discuss the ethics of human embryoids, i.e., embryo-like structures made from pluripotent stem cells for modeling natural embryos. We argue that defining our social priorities is critical to design a consistent ethical guideline for research on those new entities. The absence of clear regulations on these emerging technologies stems from an unresolved debate surrounding natural human embryo research and one common opinion that one needs to solve the question of the moral status of the human embryo before regulating their surrogate. The recent NIH funding restrictions for research on human embryoids have made scientists even more unlikely to raise their voices. As a result, the scientific community has maintained a low profile while longing for a more favorable socio-political climate for their research. This article is a call for consistency among biomedical research on human materials, trying to position human embryoids within a spectrum of existing practice from stem cell research or IVF to research involving human subjects. We specifically note that the current practices in infertility clinics of freezing human embryos or disposing of them without any consideration for their potential benefits contradicts the assumption of special consideration for human material. Conversely, creating human embryoids for research purposes could ensure that no human material be used in vain, always serving humankind. We argue here that it is time to reconsider the full ban on embryo research (human embryos and embryoids) beyond the 14-day rule and that research on those entities should obey a sliding scale combining the completeness of the model (e.g., complete vs. partial) and the developmental stage: with more advanced completeness and developmental stage of the considered entity, being associated with more rigorous evaluation of societal benefits, statements of intention, and necessity of such research.

Background Infertility presents both medical and public health challenges, with in vitro fertilization (IVF) emerging as a prominent solution, particularly when other alternatives are exhausted. However, IVF treatment raises significant ethical questions that have been under explored in the Ghanaian context. This study aimed to explore ethical constraints and dilemmas in the provision of in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment in Ghana. Methods A descriptive phenomenological qualitative design was employed. Purposive sampling techniques were used to recruit 12 participants including ART experts from three in vitro fertilization (IVF) centres, ethicists and a legal practitioner. In-depth face-to-face interviews guided by an open-ended interview guide were conducted. Thematic analysis of the interviews was performed to identify major themes. Results Providing IVF treatment in Ghana raises several ethical issues, including inequitable access due to high costs and limited availability, which favour wealthier individuals and leave marginalized populations with fewer options. There are significant ethical considerations in balancing the potential benefits of successful IVF treatment outcomes against the health risks and emotional tolls on patients. Decisions about the fate of surplus embryos present moral dilemmas, including whether to preserve, donate, or discard them. Differing personal beliefs about the moral status of the embryo further complicate the ethical landscape. Ensuring informed consent is challenging due to the complex medical, ethical, and emotional implications of IVF treatment, potentially leading to compromised consent. Additionally, there are ongoing risks of breaches in confidentiality, given the sensitive nature of reproductive health data and the importance of protecting patient privacy. Conclusion This study revealed that several ethical dilemmas confront both healthcare providers and couples in the process of IVF. There is an urgent need for the development of clear and uniform regulations to govern the practice of IVF treatment in Ghana, with further attention given to mitigating financial barriers and enhancing support systems for couples considering IVF treatment.

Singapore, a highly affluent island city-state located in Southeast Asia, has increasingly leveraged new assisted reproductive technologies (ART) to overcome its dismal fertility rates in recent years. A new frontier in ART is preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) for polygenic risk scores (PRS) to predict complex multifactorial traits in IVF (in vitro fertilisation) embryos, such as type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular diseases and various other characteristics like height, intelligence quotient (IQ), hair and eye colour. Unlike well-known safety risks with human genome editing, there are negligible risks with PGT-P, because there are no man-made genetic modifications that can be transmitted to future generations. Nevertheless, the current efficacy of using PGT-P to select IVF embryos for either increased or decreased probability of developing specific polygenic traits is still far from certain. Hence, the regulatory safeguards proposed here will be based on the assumption that the efficacy of this new technology platform has already been validated. These include: (1) restricting the application of PGT-P only for prevention of clinically relevant polygenic disease traits, (2) securely blocking patients’ access to the raw genomic DNA sequencing data of their IVF embryos, (3) validating diagnosis of polygenic disease traits in the prospective parents/grandparents of IVF embryos, and restricting PGT-P only for preventing specifically diagnosed polygenic disease traits and (4) mandating rigorous and comprehensive genetic counselling for IVF patients considering PGT-P. There is an urgent and dire need to prevent abuse of the PGT-P technique, as well as protect the interests and welfare of patients if its clinical application is to be permitted in the country.

In her recent paper, Emanuele Mangione proposes combining maternal spindle transfer (MST) and reciprocal effortless in vitro fertilisation (ReIVF) to enable both females to have genetic and gestational ties with the same child, which can particularly benefit lesbian couples. This response rejects Mangione’s proposal for the reason that the additional biological ties created by MST+ReIVF, compared with the reception of oocytes from partner (ROPA), are unnecessary. ROPA is currently the most effective method for redistributing biological ties within lesbian couples, allowing one member to provide the egg and the other to carry the fetus. The additional biological ties created by MST+ReIVF are quantitatively too small to significantly enhance parental bonding or couple relationships, and their potential harms to both prospective parents and children outweigh any minor benefits. Furthermore, like ROPA, MST+ReIVF fails to address deeper feminist concerns. Therefore, I propose a new idea: combining in vitro gametogenesis with ectogenesis, which can offer far more reproductive choices and greater potential to address deeper feminist concerns than MST+ReIVF.