In vitro fertilization has exploded in popularity despite concerns about the commodification of human life. IVF typically involves retrieving eggs from a woman’s ovaries, fertilizing the eggs with sperm, and inserting the resulting embryo into her uterus. Every year, about 2% of American babies are born from this technology.
The New York Times recently ran a piece about embryo screening, a common step in the IVF process, posing the question, “Should human life be optimized?”
Preimplantation genetic testing allows parents to screen embryos for health conditions that have known genetic correlates, including autism, schizophrenia, obesity, and cancer. Proponents will argue that this process prevents a child from sickness and suffering and lessens the likelihood that unwanted health problems will be passed on to future generations.
But this also enables individuals to select an embryo according to cosmetic preferences such as height, sex, eye color, and personality traits. For example, two of the female babies featured in the article were reportedly chosen, as embryos, by their mothers for their sex. (Imagine the outcry if a parent publicly admitted to sex-selecting for a male embryo.)
As fertility treatments’ accessibility and affordability rise, supported by President Donald Trump’s executive order, pressing questions remain regarding whether the creation and disposal of embryos is ethical.
One key concern has been that not all embryos that are created are used. Last year, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that frozen embryos are “extrauterine children.” IVF providers in the state subsequently paused treatments until a new law was passed, exempting them from legal liability. Current research guidelines restrict the growth of human embryos to 14 days.
As a former academic scientist, I believe that scientists should have freedom to pursue innovation, especially if their findings have utility in helping people. I support an individual’s choice to undergo IVF treatments. I also believe that critics have a right to voice their discomfort when humans start tinkering with reproduction.
Some of the possible risks of IVF include embryo mix-ups, birth defects, and premature deliveries. In other cases, treatment doesn’t result in the birth of a child or, alternatively, screening for a genetic mutation is not successful.
Should human reproduction be fine-tuned into a carefully controlled science experiment? In doing so, does this not imply that a child’s value is determined by physical health markers (or traits specified by their parents) and that children who don’t meet these criteria fail to possess the same inherent value or rights? How many of us, despite our successes, would have been passed over as embryos had we undergone the same filtering process?
Paired with these uncomfortable realities is a pressing question regarding why so many people are relying on IVF. Although some are motivated by a desire to design the perfect child, many others turn to IVF because they cannot conceive naturally.
Infertility is defined as the inability to get pregnant after 12 months or more of unprotected sex. One in six couples is affected by infertility, with one-third of cases attributed to male factors, one-third attributed to female factors, and a final third to both partners or unknown causes.
Today’s environment is filled with endocrine disruptors, which are chemicals that interfere with our hormonal systems. They are inciting a fertility crisis. Documented endocrine disruptors include pesticides and plasticizers, which are associated with low sperm count, poor sperm quality in men and decreased egg quality, and increased miscarriages in women. Toxic heavy metals and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (known as PFAS or “forever chemicals”) are endemic in modern life, wreaking havoc on our bodies.
EUGENICS ARE COMING BACK IN FASHION
This isn’t to say that ridding our environment of such chemicals will cure all presentations of infertility, but it certainly can’t hurt. I also don’t believe there is anything wrong with being childless, but many adults aspiring to be parents are discovering that they can’t have children.
This exemplifies the importance of health-conscious policies, fueled by movements such as Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s “Make America Healthy Again” crusade. The public deserves greater transparency and awareness about what we are being exposed to, knowingly and otherwise, through our food and water supply, the products we buy, and the air we breathe. Until these underlying factors are addressed, the use of IVF will only continue rising.
Dr. Debra Soh is a sex neuroscientist and the author of The End of Gender. Follow her @DrDebraSoh and visit DrDebraSoh.com.