This article explores the possibility that there is a parental duty to use preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) for the medical benefit of future children. Using one genetic disorder as a paradigmatic example, we find that such a duty can be supported in some situations on both ethical and legal grounds. Our analysis shows that an ethical case in favor of this position can be made when potential parents are aware that a possible future child is at substantial risk of inheriting (...) a serious genetic condition. We further argue that a legal case for a duty to use PGD for medical benefit can be made in situations in which potential parents have chosen to conceive through in vitro fertilization and know that any children conceived are at substantial risk of having a serious genetic condition. (shrink)

Hastings Center Report, Volume 51, Issue 5, Page 30-41, September‐October 2021.

_A provocative examination of how unequal access to reproductive technology replays the sins of the eugenics movement_ Eugenics, the effort to improve the human species by inhibiting reproduction of “inferior” genetic strains, ultimately came to be regarded as the great shame of the Progressive movement. Judith Daar, a prominent expert on the intersection of law and medicine, argues that current attitudes toward the potential users of modern assisted reproductive technologies threaten to replicate eugenics’ same discriminatory practices. In this book, Daar (...) asserts how barriers that block certain people’s access to reproductive technologies are often founded on biases rooted in notions of class, race, and marital status. As a result, poor, minority, unmarried, disabled, and LGBT individuals are denied technologies available to well-off nonminority heterosexual applicants. An original argument on a highly emotional and important issue, this work offers a surprising departure from more familiar arguments on the issue as it warns physicians, government agencies, and the general public against repeating the mistakes of the past. (shrink)

This article explores the impact of Dobbs on access to assisted reproductive technologies. Clinical aspects of IVF, including embryo discard and cryopreservation, preimplantation genetic testing, and selective reduction of multiple pregnancy are potentially jeopardized by a new legal landscape that protects embryos over the interest of infertility patients.

Enactment of mandated pre-procedure disclosures in abortion and assisted reproductive technology services has swelled in recent years. Calls to equally regard these mandates as neutral tools in furtherance of patient protection fail to acknowledge key substantive and structural differences in these reproduction-affecting mandates. While ART mandates permit physicians to use their medical judgment to protect presumptively vulnerable egg donors and gestational carriers, abortion disclosures impart scientifically suspect messaging aimed at dissuading women from pursuing pregnancy termination. These and other distinctions counsel (...) in favor of regarding and analyzing abortion and ART mandated disclosures as separate and distinguishable informed consent tools. (shrink)