Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

To Transfer or Not to Transfer: The Case of Comprehensive Chromosome Screening of the In Vitro Embryo

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Health Care Analysis Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The screening of in vitro embryos resulting from in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment for chromosomal abnormalities (aneuploidies) has as a primary aim to help patients achieve a successful pregnancy. Most IVF centers will not transfer aneuploid embryos, as they have an enhanced risk of leading to implantation failure and miscarriage. However, some aneuploidies, such as trisomy-21, can lead to viable pregnancies and to children with a variable health prognosis, and some prospective parents may request transfer of such embryos. I present two cases where the testing for and detection of trisomy-21 can lead to conflicts between IVF professionals and patients and argue that in most such cases respect for choices of patients should prevail.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. de Wert, G. (1999). Ethics of assisted reproduction. In B. C. J. M. Fauser (Ed.), Molecular biology in reproductive medicine (pp. 433–448). New York: Parthenon.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Draper, H., & Chadwick, R. (1999). Beware! Preimplantation genetic diagnosis may solve some old problems but it also raises new ones. Journal of Medical Ethics, 25, 114–120.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Edwards, S. D. (2001). Prevention of disability on grounds of suffering. Journal of Medical Ethics, 27, 380–382.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Gavaghan, C. (2007). Defending the genetic supermarket: Law and ethics of selecting the next generation. London: Routledge-Cavendish.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Harris, J. (2000). Is there a coherent social conception of disability? Journal of Medical Ethics, 26, 95–100.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hens, K., Dondorp, W., Handyside, A. H., Harper, J., Newson, A. J., Pennings, G., et al. (2013). Dynamics and ethics of comprehensive preimplantation genetic testing: A review of the challenges. Human Reproduction Update, 19, 366–375.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Hens, K., Dondorp, W. J., Geraedts, J. P., & de Wert, G. M. (2013). Comprehensive embryo testing. Experts’ opinions regarding future directions: An expert panel study on comprehensive embryo testing. Human Reproduction, 28, 1418–1425.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Morris, J. K., Wald, N. J., & Watt, H. C. (1999). Fetal loss in Down syndrome pregnancies. Prenatal Diagnosis, 19, 142–145.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Pennings, G., & de Wert, G. (2003). Evolving ethics in medically assisted reproduction. Human Reproduction Update, 9, 397–404.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Pennings, G., de Wert, G., Shenfield, F., Cohen, J., Tarlatzis, B., & Devroey, P. (2007). ESHRE task force on ethics and law 13: The welfare of the child in medically assisted reproduction. Human Reproduction, 22, 2585–2588.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Pieters, J. J., Kooper, A. J., van Kessel, A. G., Braat, D. D., & Smits, A. P. (2011). Incidental prenatal diagnosis of sex chromosome aneuploidies: Health, behavior, and fertility. ISRN Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2011, 807106.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Robertson, J. A. (1996). Children of choice. Freedom and the new reproductive technologies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Roizen, N. J., & Patterson, D. (2003). Down’s syndrome. The Lancet, 361, 1281–1289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Savulescu, J. (2007). In defence of procreative beneficence. Journal of Medical Ethics, 33, 284–288.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Savulescu, J. (2001). Procreative beneficence: Why we should select the best children. Bioethics, 15, 413–426.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Savulescu, J., & Kahane, G. (2009). The moral obligation to create children with the best chance of the best life. Bioethics, 23, 274–290.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Skotko, B. G., & Levine, S. P. (2006). What the other children are thinking: Brothers and sisters of persons with Down syndrome. American Journal of Medical Genetics. Part C, Seminars in Medical Genetics, 142C, 180–186.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Skotko, B. G., Levine, S. P., & Goldstein, R. (2011). Having a son or daughter with Down syndrome: Perspectives from mothers and fathers. American Journal of Medical Genetics. Part A, 155A, 2335–2347.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Skotko, B. G., Levine, S. P., & Goldstein, R. (2011). Self-perceptions from people with Down syndrome. American Journal of Medical Genetics. Part A, 155A, 2360–2369.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sybert, V. P., & McCauley, E. (2004). Turner’s syndrome. New England Journal of Medicine, 351, 1227–1238.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Centre for Society and Life Sciences (Project Number: 70.1.074). I would like to thank Daniela Cutas, Wybo Dondorp, Guido de Wert, Inge Liebaers and the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Health, Ethics and Society, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200, Maastricht, The Netherlands

    Kristien Hens

  2. GROW, School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200, Maastricht, The Netherlands

    Kristien Hens

  3. Centre for Society and the Life Sciences (CSG), P.O. Box 9010, 6500, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Kristien Hens

Authors
  1. Kristien Hens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kristien Hens.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hens, K. To Transfer or Not to Transfer: The Case of Comprehensive Chromosome Screening of the In Vitro Embryo. Health Care Anal 23, 197–206 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-013-0259-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-013-0259-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation