Double trouble: Should double embryo transfer be banned?

Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 36 (2):121-139 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

What role should legislation or policy play in avoiding the complications of in-vitro fertilization? In this article, we focus on single versus double embryo transfer, and assess three arguments in favour of mandatory single embryo transfer: risks to the mother, risks to resultant children, and costs to society. We highlight significant ethical concerns about each of these. Reproductive autonomy and non-paternalism are strong enough to outweigh the health concerns for the woman. Complications due to non-identity cast doubt on the extent to which children are harmed. Twinning may offer an overall benefit rather than burden to society. Finally, including the future health costs for children in reproductive policy is inconsistent with other decisions. We conclude that mandatory single embryo transfer is not justified and that a number of countries should reconsider their current embryo transfer policy

Other Versions

No versions found

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-03-27

Downloads
756 (#37,086)

6 months
115 (#56,959)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Julian Savulescu
Oxford University
Dominic Wilkinson
Oxford University
G. Owen Schaefer
National University of Singapore

References found in this work

Reasons and Persons.Derek Parfit - 1984 - Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press.
Reasons and Persons.Joseph Margolis - 1984 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 47 (2):311-327.
On Liberty.John Stuart Mill - 1859 - Broadview Press.
On Liberty.John Stuart Mill - 1956 - Broadview Press.

View all 21 references / Add more references