New reproductive techniques require a new morality

Emma Crichton-Miller reviews Everything Conceivable: How Assisted Reproduction is Changing Men, Women and the World by Liza Mundy

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2007/06/28/bomun124.xml

In the epilogue of this thought-provoking book, Liza Mundy writes of a friend seeing, on holiday on a New Jersey beach, a plane flying overhead. Stretched out behind trailed a banner reading: 'WOMEN EARN $8000 AGE 20-30 888-968 EGGS'. With the same brash commercial energy that powers so much of the United States economy, breeding possibility from desire, the plane was soliciting human eggs.

For most of human history these microscopic cells have required jealous protection, their awesome potential as much a burden as a joy. Today they have become one of modern America's most hotly pursued commodities. And here they were being touted for like so much valuable scrap. As Mundy recalls, 'When my friend told me about this, I experienced a moment of clarity, when it was possible to look a reproductive phenomenon straight in the eye and say: Well, this does not seem like a good thing.'

This is a rare and well-earned moment of moral decision in a book that mostly eschews judgement in favour of exhaustive exploration of one of the biggest social and scientific changes of the past 50 years. The title of the book makes a grand claim. It argues that the extraordinary achievements of reproductive science, culminating in the much-publicised successes of IVF, of surrogacy and of sperm and egg donation, are changing irrevocably both society and human nature.

Mundy goes on to argue that in making possible families previously thought impossible (families with menopausal mothers or with two gay parents), or even simply very unlikely (families of fathers with no sperm count or of surviving quins), there is as much to worry about as to celebrate. Moreover, the book insists that far from affecting only a tiny minority of hugely wealthy North Americans, these changes are set to recur and replicate their effects across the world. Infertility, estimated to afflict 80 million people worldwide, is likely only to rise, encouraged as it is as much by poverty and pollution as by late motherhood; meanwhile affluence and science will continue to seek solutions.

Liza Mundy is a highly respected journalist on the Washington Post and in this timely book, she not only documents how inspired scientists have revolutionised how some of us conceive, and indeed conceive of conception, but she does so from every possible angle. What brings this book alive, however, are the compassionately realised personal stories.

We meet Laura and Hector Ramirez, who are trying to define a role in their family for Kendra Vanderipe, the donor of the eggs which have become their triplet sons. We meet Gretchen Lee and Evie Leder, a lesbian couple with their daughter, Rose, and Doug Okun and Eric Ethington with their twin daughters, Sophia and Elizabeth. We hear a string of SMCs - single mothers by choice - recall the reasoning that led them to the sperm bank. These are all stories to celebrate, they show how technology can free human beings from flaws and enable fundamental happiness. As a mother herself, Mundy understands the longing for and deep joy of parenthood.

But just about midway through the book, the marvellous upwards trajectory falters and then collapses in chaos and distress. At first Mundy turns the spotlight from the parents, revelling in their fulfilled parenthood, to the children of donor sperm and eggs, to ask what their rights and feelings might be. We learn that Doug and Eric's wonderfully generous surrogate mother almost died and required an emergency hysterectomy in giving birth to their twins.

Then Mundy meets Melissa and Brett Middleton, who could only afford one cycle of IVF, gambled with four implanted embryos and ended up with three very fragile triplets; and Tammy and Steve LaMantia, who opted to implant three not two embryos and lost all three at birth. As Mundy asks, 'What map exists for this uncharted territory of the heart?'

Just as Mundy has been unflinching in asking all the difficult questions, so at this point she faces all the difficult facts. She witnesses horrifying but potentially life-saving operations to 'delete' dangerously surplus foetuses in the womb; she considers the fate of the 400,000 (so far) excess frozen embryos in the United States alone; she ponders the consequences for poor single women of the hunger that stem-cell research may create for human eggs; she worries about the betrayal of traditional parenthood involved in substituting control and choice for chance and unconditional love; above all, she is revolted by the rampant commercialisation that can lead unscrupulous doctors and demanding would-be parents to ignore the huge physical, psychological and moral effects of these life-creating technologies.

In a sense what Mundy traces is the story that has increasingly become the core story for her, and indeed my, generation of women: how the battle to achieve freedom to control conception gave way to a battle to conceive. Coming to maturity around 1978, the year that Louise Brown, the first test-tube baby, was born, Mundy has seen her contemporaries experience divorce, enforced singleness and infertility, as well as enjoy the benefits of stimulating careers and the redemptive rise of assisted reproduction. She is only too aware that this mid-term report can offer no final judgements about the long-term value of assisted reproductive technologies.

We have only begun to address the social and evolutionary implications of these techniques and to feel their moral and psychological impact. This book, enlivened by Mundy's generous sympathy and agile moral intelligence, is a major contribution to the debate.

Local fertility specialist and researcher passionate about helping build families

By VINCE HEALD, Special to the Daily Transcript http://www.sddt.com/Search/article.cfm?SourceCode=20070622crg

Wood assembled that team, principally with Chief Scientific Officer Andrew French, Ph.D., and thus Stemagen Inc., a privately funded embryonic stem cell research company, was born.


Heald is principal of Beck Ellman Heald. Reproductive Sciences Center: www.fertile.com Stemagen: www.stemagen.com

Third-party reproduction demands specialization

Friday, June 22, 2007
If you are a family law attorney, physician or health care practitioner dealing with someone considering utilizing third-party reproduction and IVF to create a family, you must make certain that they are represented by an attorney that concentrates exclusively in this area and who has the experience to back up their advice. More specifically, several recent court cases have created a media storm, such as the Roman v. Roman case in the state of Texas where the now divorced couple is fighting over their frozen embryos. Whatever the outcome in this matter, these cases suggest a need to review the sufficiency of existing protocols, consents and documentation in light of the current uncertainties in the law in most states. The possibility of facing these issues in your own practice makes the proper advice and education so important. Together, we must promote that third-party reproduction and IVF are not adventures that one travels alone; instead, it should be seen as a journey that must be properly planned out before any cycle commences. Contact Theresa M. Erickson directly at (858) 748-4133 or terickson@ericksonlaw.net for a free consultation. Submitted by Theresa M. Erickson of Erickson Law, a Professional Law Corporation

Ca. Assembly Eyes Permission for HIV+ Donors to Conceive

The California Assembly?s Health Committee passed a bill last week to allow women to use medical techniques to conceive using the sperm of an HIV-positive prospective father without risk of transmitting the virus that causes AIDS.Gay.com reported last Thursday that under current California law, prospective fathers who are HIV positive may not use assisted reproduction technology to enable a female partner to conceive.But modern technology allows the sperm from HIV positive men to be rendered safe and virus-free."All families deserve access to the tools that reproductive science has to offer," said Democratic Sen. Carole Migden, who introduced the bill, in a written statement."In this case, California law needs to catch up with technology because, whether inadvertent or not, it discriminates against HIV-positive men" Midgen continued. "My legislation will ensure equal reproductive rights for all women, regardless of their partners? HIV status."The provision that prevents women from receiving sperm from HIV positive men is part of a larger law that bans the use of organs, tissues, and other biological material from HIV infected donors. Aside from Delaware, California is the only state that bans the practice of using virus-stripped sperm for conception, although the method has been available for a decade.California and Delaware are the only states that bar the procedure, which has been available for 10 years.The Gay.com story cited Migden?s office as saying that numerous studies from America and abroad confirm that modern assisted reproduction technologies are safe for use, demonstrating no transmission of HIV from donor to recipient with use of the modern techniques.In the article, University of California, San Francisco?s Dr. Deborah Cohan cited the more than 4,000 instances of women receiving sperm from HIV positive men via the modern techniques, resulting in 700 births; not a single instance of HIV transmission has occurred either to the mother or the baby.Dr. Cohan, who is the Medical Director of the Bay Area Perinatal AIDS Center, said, "I am thrilled at the prospect of being able to offer my patients a safe method of conceiving."Added Dr. Cohan, "With potent antiretroviral therapy now available, HIV-infected individuals live increasingly healthy and normal lives and many want to have families. With this important bill, we will be able to offer them a safe way of building healthy families."http://www.edgeboston.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=glbt&sc2=news&sc3=&id=21215

Comparison Of PGD And IVF Treatments Show That Children Born Equally Healthy After Both Procedures

Children born after embryo biopsy for preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) do not show any more major malformations than those born after artificial reproduction technologies (ART) without PGD, as reported at the annual conference of the European Society of Human Genetics today. Professor Ingeborg Liebaers, from the Research Centre for Reproductive Genetics, Free University of Brussels, Brussels, Belgium, says that the results of her study of 583 children born after PGD was reassuring.PGD is a new option for couples at risk of transmitting genetic diseases. Instead of carrying out a prenatal diagnosis followed by a termination of pregnancy, in vitro fertilisation (IVF) with intracytoplasmic sperm injection (where a sperm is injected directly into an egg) is performed, followed by genetic testing of the embryos. Only unaffected embryos are subsequently transferred to the womb."Because embryos are biopsied in PGD procedures, and this constitutes an additional manipulation of a delicate organism, we set out to study whether this had any effect on the health of children who were born as a result of this procedure", says Professor Liebaers. The scientists first collected data on the pregnancies by giving questionnaires to patients on the day of the embryo transfer. Additional questionnaires were sent during pregnancy, at delivery, and later on to the patients, their gynaecologists, and paediatricians. Children were examined at 2 months and 2 years old."After embryo transfer, 563 children of the 583 were liveborn, 20 were stillborn, and 9 died neonatally. It seems that the perinatal death rate is higher, especially in multiple pregnancies, then in IVF and ICSi children. We need to further investigate these perinatal death rates," says Professor Liebaers, "but we were encouraged to find that the major malformation rate was only 3.6%, or no higher than that which is found in children born after conventional IVF and ICSI."The average length of the pregnancies of singleton births was 38.8 weeks and the mean birthweight 3.268 kg, comparable to those of IVF and ICSI children, she says."The study is the first of a large series of PGD children from one centre", Professor Liebaers will tell the conference, "and we will be carrying out further follow-up as these children grow older. But we feel that results to date are reassuring; it is good to know that a procedure that can offer patients hope of having a baby unaffected by serious disease is also safe in the longer-term."http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=74530

2-for-1 is no baby bargain, doctors say - MSNBC

For couples struggling to conceive a child, news of becoming pregnant with multiples following infertility treatment is often cause for celebration. Some even wish for it.

"I hear that frequently: I want twins. I don't want to pay for this again. The two-birds-with-one-stone thing," says Dr. Robert Stillman, medical director of Shady Grove Fertility Center in Washington, D.C., and a clinical professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Georgetown University School of Medicine. They see twins in a stroller at Starbucks and think, I've been at this for four years. Why not just do this two at a time?

But the truth is that having multiples, even twins, comes with significant health risks, and the cost of their care can be staggering.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17937811/

Elle Article - See Link for complete article

DANI SHAPIRO SPARED NO EFFORT OR EXPENSE IN HER QUEST TO FIND THE PERFECT EGG DONOR?ONE WITH HER INTELLECT, HER LOOKS, EVEN HER FEELINGS. BUT THEN THEY MET, AND SHE REALIZED THAT EVEN THE FINEST REPRODUCTIONS STILL AREN'T THE REAL THINGThe palm-filled lobby of Shutters on the Beach, an upscale hotel perched on the edge of the Pacific Ocean in Santa Monica, is a good spot for a blind date. With overstuffed chairs and sofas grouped around low coffee tables, and fireplaces blazing in the middle of a hot California afternoon, Shutters is a place where you can sit and talk, and no one will notice you or care.I've chosen a table near some drinking Europeans, with a clear view across the lobby to the front doors. I'm early, anxious. A Fred Segal shopping bag containing a gaily wrapped gift is at my feet. Only a few people in the world know I'm here. It feels as if I'm waiting to do something illicit?something involving sex or drugs. Which, in a way, I suppose I am.A tall blond in a white pantsuit walks in, preceded by two chihuahuas straining on their leashes. Not her. A trio of young women in jeans and tailored jackets?Hollywood development-girl types?scan the room for a table. Not her, not her, not her.Finally?at exactly three-thirty, our appointed time?a slight woman in jeans, a pink T-shirt, and a blazer walks into the lobby. I recognize her instantly. She's looking for me, too, though I have the advantage. She hasn't seen my photograph. She has no idea what I look like, though she'd be correct in assuming that I am probably similar to her in build and coloring?an older version.http://www.elle.com/featurefullstory/10235/there-is-no-me-without-you.html

U.S. women crossing globe for fertility help

In August of 2005, Shauna Anderson treated herself to a vacation of sorts: three weeks in Cape Town, South Africa, more than 10,000 miles from her home just outside Seattle, for a little respite, a safari ? and a round of in vitro fertilization (IVF).

Not your typical vacation itinerary, but one that?s becoming increasingly popular among American women struggling with infertility issues and overwhelmed by the cost of IVF in the United States. By traveling abroad for fertility procedures, women can pay thousands of dollars less than what they?d spend at home.

But some experts caution women to look carefully at the standards, practices and success rates of foreign clinics, especially those that are located in poorer countries and offer donor eggs. By going overseas, women may be paying for a procedure that has a lower chance of success than in the U.S. And there?s been at least one reported case of a Romanian clinic recruiting illiterate donors and failing to take appropriate measures to make sure that those donors were giving fully informed consent.

Anderson, now 35, says the path that took her beyond borders began four years ago when she decided to become a single mom and underwent inseminations using sperm from an anonymous donor.

Crossing the line ?Cycle after cycle, I kept having negative results on the pregnancy test,? she says. ?Then I started to add drugs to the protocol, and that didn?t work. I had a couple of surgical procedures to make sure the pipes were clean, and that didn?t help. Before I knew it, I?d crossed the line into IVF.?

And a new realm of financial commitment. Anderson ?s insurance would cover only the diagnosis of infertility, not any treatments, so she paid out of pocket for two IVF procedures in Seattle. Neither produced a pregnancy. By that point, she was down more than $15,000 ? still, a drop in the bucket compared to what some U.S. women end up paying. The average cost of IVF in the U.S. is currently about $12,000 per cycle, according to Pamela Madsen, executive director and founder of the American Fertility Association, a patient education and advocacy group.

Anderson first got the idea to investigate IVF abroad after reading an article on the rise of medical tourism for procedures such as hip replacement and cataract surgery. She was inspired to investigate South Africa, among other countries, as she?d been following the blog of a South African woman who?d been navigating her own fertility problems.

After two weeks of Internet research and several late-night phone calls to clinics around the world ? seeking information on everything from success rates to lab controls to sanitation standards to their willingness to treat a single woman ? she chose a clinic in Cape Town, booked a flight and headed south.

The cost of her three-week IVF vacation? About $6,400, including airfare and hotel stay. Anderson?s IVF ? including drugs, procedures, and lab and hospital fees ? accounted for just $3,600 of that total.?

While there are no overall statistics collected on overseas IVF, the Cape Fertility Clinic, where Anderson underwent her IVF, reports 10 to 15 patients from the U.S. per month so far in 2007, roughly double the numbers it saw in 2006. And last month?s media reports on the 60-year-old New Jersey woman who gave birth to twins, produced after a visit to a South African fertility clinic specializing in older patients, will likely serve to increase those numbers ? especially among women who seek to have children later in life.

The American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) hasn?t issued an official stance on this trend, but for women who are looking into the overseas option, Dr. David Adamson, the fertility organization?s president-elect, warns them to be aware of what they may be giving up ? namely the oversight and standards that apply to IVF clinics in the U.S.

The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention validates and reports clinic success rates, for instance, and the Food and Drug Administration requires registration of all clinics providing sperm and egg donation services.

Adamson also points to the success rates for IVF in the U.S., which, he says, are quite high, compared to other countries in the world.

Shopping for donor eggs In addition to less costly IVF, the prospect of cheaper donor eggs is also sending American women abroad. In the U.S., introducing donor eggs to the equation typically means adding thousands of dollars to the cost of IVF, in the form of donor and agency fees and costs associated with donor screening (for genetic issues, STDs, etc.) and care.

That?s what Fran, who asked that her last name not be used, discovered as she contemplated her first IVF cycle earlier this year. Unable to conceive after a year of trying, the 44-year-old began researching IVF at clinics near her home in Massachusetts. Like Anderson, Fran and her husband were faced with paying for the treatment out of pocket, as their insurance wouldn?t cover it due to Fran?s age. Doubting that she?d have success with her own, Fran and her husband decided to use donor eggs, but after researching the local options, she says they learned they could expect to pay about $30,000.

Through a friend of a friend, Fran heard about a clinic in the Czech Republic. Naturally, she had questions. ?I didn?t want to be on someone?s couch in an alley,? she says. She contacted ivfvacation.com, a Web site run by an Ohio-based husband-and-wife team that helps American women arrange and take IVF vacations to the Czech Republic. Their services include helping women fill out medical questionnaires prior to departure, booking accommodations and car rentals, planning tours and arranging translating services for clinic appointments.

They referred Fran to past clients and pointed her toward an Internet bulletin board, where she found postings about the agency and the clinic it uses, the Clinic for Reproductive Medicine and Gynecology in Zlin. The facility, about three and a half hours from Prague, reports having treated 40 women from the U.S. last year, and, on average, seven to 10 American women each month in 2007.

There is no international body regulating fertility clinics on issues such as donor recruitment practices and safety standards. In the European Union, a law was passed last year setting standards for the donation, testing, storage and so on of human cells and tissues; however, it?s up to individual member countries to regulate compliance. IVF patients who, like Fran and Anderson, choose to go abroad often rely on the Internet to hunt for information on the services and standards of individual clinics outside their home countries.

Guido Pennings, a professor of ethics and bioethics at Ghent University in Belgium and co-coordinator of the Task Force on Ethics and Law of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), cautions that women researching their options this way should be careful. Success rates published on a clinic?s Web site, for example, may not be accurate. If a country doesn?t have a central registry that monitors fertility clinics? reported rates, ?there?s no way they can prove it to you,? he warns. And while a country may have laws seeking to regulate clinics in these and other matters, Pennings says, ?You can have a good law, but if no one checks it, you won?t know if clinics are following the rules or not. That is the case in a lot of European countries.?

Pennings also notes concerns over donor consent in poor countries, such as the case in Romania where illiterate donors were reportedly recruited. He warns that the poorer the country, the greater the risk of this sort of practice.

The AFA?s Madsen echoes Pennings? concerns regarding reported success rates. She advises women looking at clinics abroad to check to see if rates are verified by a government body or a private auditor. In addition, she encourages women to ask, ??Are rates divided by age, or do they give one number? ? which means there could be patients under 25, and you are a 37-year-old woman.?

There?s also the question of safety.

Dr. John Frattarelli, a reproductive endocrinologist, obstetrician and gynecologist at Reproductive Medicine Associates of New Jersey, says he?s treated two patients who?ve suffered mild ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) as a result of overseas IVF. However, he notes, ?That is not a knock on the provider performing the services. It?s a complication that any of us get.?

The problem, he says, is that OHSS can increase the risk of blood clots, commonly in the legs ? already a concern for anyone on a long airplane flight. Symptoms can also include fluid in the abdomen or lungs, a dangerous situation if a woman is in a country where she can?t get adequate health care.

For women like Fran who are seeking an egg donor, Frattarelli calls out another potential issue: the adequacy of donor screening for genetic and other issues. ?In the U.S., donors are screened very thoroughly,? he says. ?Other countries don?t necessarily have that.?

Do your homework He advises women to do their homework when considering a clinic abroad. ?Look at the credentials of the hospital,? he says.

After researching online the staff of the Zlin clinic and corresponding with several American women who?d been there, Fran decided to sign up for a trip to the Czech Republic. Next, it came time to pick her donor.

According to Marcela Fite, one of the co-proprietors behind ivfvacation.com, many donors at the Zlin clinic are college-educated (Zlin is a university town), and, at a minimum, must have completed high school. According to the clinic, donors undergo genetic and STD screening and receive no more than $715, for travel expenses and discomfort associated with ovarian stimulation and egg retrieval. (Legally, donors in the Czech Republic cannot be compensated for the actual eggs produced. According to the Czech Statistics Office, the average monthly wage in the Czech Republic is about $970.)

For Fran and her husband, the most important criteria was that their donor be healthy and have healthy children of her own or have produced a pregnancy through donation. Following that, says Fran, she wanted her donor to be under 30, have hair color and eye color similar to hers and have a college degree.

In April, Fran and her husband traveled to the Czech Republic. Two weeks and about $12,500 later ? including the cost of donor eggs, drugs and procedures, as well as airfare, transportation, food and accommodation for two ? she?d been implanted with three embryos. (According to ivfvacation.com, couples using donor eggs can usually expect to pay about $7,300, excluding airfare; women using their own eggs typically pay $5,700.)

Finally, two weeks later, Fran learned she was pregnant. She's due in January.

Anderson's trip was less fruitful. The procedure in Cape Town didn?t produce a pregnancy.

No regrets After returning home, Anderson decided to give up on using her own eggs, and ultimately conceived her twin daughters, now a year old, using donated frozen embryos. (The frozen embryo transfer, which doesn?t require ovarian stimulation and egg retrieval, cost $4,555.) Nonetheless, Anderson says she doesn?t regret going to South Africa.

?It was an incredible experience,? she says. ?You have this nice pleasantness of a vacation wrapped around this very stressful situation. And you get to do it a little more privately, instead of being surrounded by co-workers and friends, pretending it?s your everyday life ? and during an IVF cycle, it never is.?

Fran agrees. IVF treatment is so stressful. You become so focused on it: When?s your next appointment? What day is it in your cycle? Being overseas really gave us the opportunity to have hours and hours not to think about it. We were renting the car, trying to read the road signs, meeting new people, seeing places ... there was so much time we were just tourists.?

?We had a vacation,? she adds. ?Aside from everything else.?

M. Susan Wilson is a Seattle-based freelance writer and editor.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19100571/page/2/

Survey belies tales of donor egg market gone awry - Reuters UK

By Anne HardingNEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Media reports of an out-of-control market for human eggs fueled by desperate couples willing to pay large sums are exaggerated, results of a survey suggest.The average donor compensation for 191 fertility clinics surveyed nationwide was $4,217, well within the $5,000 limit established by the American Society of Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) in 2000, Sharon N. Covington of the Shady Grove Fertility Reproductive Science Center in Rockville, Maryland and Dr. William E. Gibbons of the Women's Center for Reproductive Medicine in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, found."I think that's what gets headlines is to look at an industry that's kind of out of control and gone awry, and we don't believe that that's the case," Covington, who conducted the survey for the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART), told Reuters Health."One of the purposes of a study like this is to give consumers information to empower them so that they can make choices," she added in an interview.The ASRM had established $5,000 as the upper limit for standard egg compensation, with payments above $10,000 "beyond what is appropriate." But there remains no objective way to put a price on human ova, the researchers note in a report in the journal Fertility and Sterility.The ASRM had suggested a formula based on multiplying the average number of hours an egg donor spends in a medical setting -- 56 -- with the standard payment for a sperm donation. Based on a sperm donor payment of $65 to $70 in 2000 dollars, the ASRM came up with a "justifiable" price of $3,360 to $4,200 per egg.In the current study, the researchers contacted 394 SART member clinics, and 191 responded. Eighty percent said they paid the same fee to all donors. There was some regional variation in compensation, ranging from roughly $5,000, on average, for the northeastern and western US to $2,900 in the northwestern part of the country.Covington and Gibbons admit their analysis does not cover the entire field of donor egg payment; one western agency had told SART it couldn't comply with the society's guidelines and compete in the marketplace. And the researchers did not survey donor egg agencies, they note, which represent a "burgeoning, consumer-driven industry." Such agencies must agree to comply with ASRM and SART standards in order to be listed on their Web sites, the researchers add, but "it is unclear whether they are in fact doing so."?Nevertheless, Covington and Gibbons conclude, their "reassuring" findings indicate that the "vast majority" of fertility clinics are complying with ASRM guidelines on donor egg compensation.SOURCE: Fertility and Sterility, May 2007.http://uk.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUKFLE16477220070531?pageNumber=2