From my admittedly limited understanding of IVF protocols, the overproduction of embryos I believe arises from the reality that many embryos simply do not implant in the womb and proceed to gestate naturally. As your own experience seems to indicate, only one in four embryos used in a single IVF procedure successfully gestates, and if th…
From my admittedly limited understanding of IVF protocols, the overproduction of embryos I believe arises from the reality that many embryos simply do not implant in the womb and proceed to gestate naturally. As your own experience seems to indicate, only one in four embryos used in a single IVF procedure successfully gestates, and if this is the rough ratio of successful implantations, then IVF would necessarily require creating more embryos than are technically needed.
Many naturally conceived embryos fail to implant in the uterus, and a fair number also result in early term miscarriage. This is part and parcel of the natural reproductive cycle, and so embryos which fail to gestate successfully do not pose any significant ethical dilemmas that I can see.
The issue is--and the Alabama legislative "fix" does not address this at all--that it is uncertain what should, if anything, be done with the "excess" embryos? Can they be used to facilitate pregnancy and childbirth with another woman? Should they be used in that fashion?
All the "fix" does is indemnify and hold harmless IVF clinics when there is an accidental or wrongful but deliberate destruction of embryos. As Alabama's constitution affirmatively declares that life begins at conception, this "fix" is tantamount to giving IVF clinics a free pass for homicide.
In time, there will be another IVF clinic which accidentally destroys an embryo, killing a nascent human life. The would-be parents of that destroyed human life will challenge the legitimacy of this "fix", and they may prevail, because even without the sanctity of life language in Alabama's constitution, there will come a point whereby allowing IVF clinics to escape consequence for all duties of care (which this law arguably allows) is simply not sustainable as an operation of law. Whether that results in simple repeal of the "fix" or the crafting of a "new and improved Fix" is impossible to say.
But again go back to my original point, if you can successfully freeze eggs then my (male) part that takes place in a quiet room with a ‘90s Playboy Girls of the Big 10 magazine can be done repeatedly at any time. There is an aspect of “just in time production” from the business world that we could seemingly adopt here.
On the surface at least, a "just in time" approach to IVF would be plausible, and perhaps would result in even fewer embryos needing to be stored.
Are there specific medical and scientific reasons for the extra embryos? That I do not know.
I do know that this is yet one more reason why there needs to be a fairly comprehensive debate on the topic, and not just within the halls of Congress.
From my admittedly limited understanding of IVF protocols, the overproduction of embryos I believe arises from the reality that many embryos simply do not implant in the womb and proceed to gestate naturally. As your own experience seems to indicate, only one in four embryos used in a single IVF procedure successfully gestates, and if this is the rough ratio of successful implantations, then IVF would necessarily require creating more embryos than are technically needed.
Many naturally conceived embryos fail to implant in the uterus, and a fair number also result in early term miscarriage. This is part and parcel of the natural reproductive cycle, and so embryos which fail to gestate successfully do not pose any significant ethical dilemmas that I can see.
The issue is--and the Alabama legislative "fix" does not address this at all--that it is uncertain what should, if anything, be done with the "excess" embryos? Can they be used to facilitate pregnancy and childbirth with another woman? Should they be used in that fashion?
All the "fix" does is indemnify and hold harmless IVF clinics when there is an accidental or wrongful but deliberate destruction of embryos. As Alabama's constitution affirmatively declares that life begins at conception, this "fix" is tantamount to giving IVF clinics a free pass for homicide.
In time, there will be another IVF clinic which accidentally destroys an embryo, killing a nascent human life. The would-be parents of that destroyed human life will challenge the legitimacy of this "fix", and they may prevail, because even without the sanctity of life language in Alabama's constitution, there will come a point whereby allowing IVF clinics to escape consequence for all duties of care (which this law arguably allows) is simply not sustainable as an operation of law. Whether that results in simple repeal of the "fix" or the crafting of a "new and improved Fix" is impossible to say.
But again go back to my original point, if you can successfully freeze eggs then my (male) part that takes place in a quiet room with a ‘90s Playboy Girls of the Big 10 magazine can be done repeatedly at any time. There is an aspect of “just in time production” from the business world that we could seemingly adopt here.
On the surface at least, a "just in time" approach to IVF would be plausible, and perhaps would result in even fewer embryos needing to be stored.
Are there specific medical and scientific reasons for the extra embryos? That I do not know.
I do know that this is yet one more reason why there needs to be a fairly comprehensive debate on the topic, and not just within the halls of Congress.