In vitro fertilisation ( IVF) is a process of fertilisation in which an ovum is combined with spermatozoon in vitro ("in glass"). The process involves monitoring and stimulating the Ovulation cycle, then removing an ovum or ova (egg or eggs) from the ovary and enabling sperm to fertilise them in a culture medium in a laboratory. After a fertilised egg (zygote) undergoes embryo culture for 2–6 days, it is Embryo transfer by catheter into the uterus, with the intention of establishing a successful pregnancy.
IVF is a type of assisted reproductive technology used to treat infertility, enable gestational surrogacy, and, in combination with pre-implantation genetic testing, avoid the transmission of abnormal genetic conditions. When a fertilised egg from egg and sperm donors implants in the uterus of a genetically unrelated surrogate, the resulting child is also genetically unrelated to the surrogate. Some countries have banned or otherwise regulated the availability of IVF treatment, giving rise to fertility tourism. Financial cost and age may also restrict the availability of IVF as a means of carrying a healthy pregnancy to term.
In July 1978, Louise Brown was the first child successfully born after her mother received IVF treatment. Brown was born as a result of natural-cycle IVF, where no stimulation was made. The procedure took place at Dr Kershaw's Cottage Hospital in Royton, Oldham, England. Robert Edwards, surviving member of the development team, was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 2010.
When assisted by egg donation and IVF, many women who have reached menopause, have infertile partners, or have idiopathic female-fertility issues, can still become pregnant. After the IVF treatment, some couples get pregnant without any fertility treatments. In 2023, it was estimated that twelve million children had been born worldwide using IVF and other assisted reproduction techniques. A 2019 study that evaluated the use of 10 adjuncts with IVF (screening hysteroscopy, DHEA, testosterone, GH, aspirin, heparin, antioxidants, seminal plasma and PRP) suggested that (with the exception of hysteroscopy) these adjuncts should be avoided until there is more evidence to show that they are safe and effective.
A colloquial term for babies conceived as the result of IVF, "test tube babies", refers to the tube-shaped containers of glass or plastic resin, called , that are commonly used in chemistry and biology labs. However, IVF is usually performed in , which are both wider and shallower and often used to cultivate cultures.
IVF is a form of assisted reproductive technology.
The second successful birth of a 'test tube baby' occurred in India on October 3, 1978, just 67 days after Louise Brown was born. The girl, named Durga, was conceived in vitro using a method developed independently by Subhash Mukhopadhyay, a physician and researcher from Hazaribag. Mukhopadhyay had been performing experiments on his own with primitive instruments and a household refrigerator. However, state authorities prevented him from presenting his work at scientific conferences, and it was many years before Mukhopadhyay's contribution was acknowledged in works dealing with the subject.
Adriana Iliescu held the record as the oldest woman to give birth using IVF and a donor egg, when she gave birth in 2004 at the age of 66, a record passed in 2006. After the IVF treatment some couples are able to get pregnant without any fertility treatments. In 2018 it was estimated that eight million children had been born worldwide using IVF and other assisted reproduction techniques.
According to UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines, IVF treatment is appropriate in cases of unexplained infertility for people who have not conceived after 2 years of regular unprotected sexual intercourse.
In people with anovulation, it may be an alternative after 7–12 attempted cycles of ovulation induction, since the latter is expensive and more easy to control.
The success rate depends on variable factors such as age of the woman, cause of infertility, embryo status, reproductive history, and lifestyle factors. Younger candidates of IVF are more likely to get pregnant. People older than 41 are more likely to get pregnant with a donor egg. People who have been previously pregnant are in many cases more successful with IVF treatments than those who have never been pregnant.
A 2021 summary compiled by the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART) which reports the average IVF success rates in the United States per age group using non-donor eggs compiled the following data:
4 |
In 2006, Canadian clinics reported a live birth rate of 27%. Birth rates in younger patients were slightly higher, with a success rate of 35.3% for those 21 and younger, the youngest group evaluated. Success rates for older patients were also lower and decrease with age, with 37-year-olds at 27.4% and no live births for those older than 48, the oldest group evaluated. Some clinics exceeded these rates, but it is impossible to determine if that is due to superior technique or patient selection, since it is possible to artificially increase success rates by refusing to accept the most difficult patients or by steering them into oocyte donation cycles (which are compiled separately). Further, pregnancy rates can be increased by the placement of several embryos at the risk of increasing the chance for multiples.
Because not each IVF cycle that is started will lead to oocyte retrieval or embryo transfer, reports of live birth rates need to specify the denominator, namely IVF cycles started, IVF retrievals, or embryo transfers. The SART summarised 2008–9 success rates for US clinics for fresh embryo cycles that did not involve donor eggs and gave live birth rates by the age of the prospective mother, with a peak at 41.3% per cycle started and 47.3% per embryo transfer for patients under 35 years of age.
IVF attempts in multiple cycles result in increased cumulative live birth rates. Depending on the demographic group, one study reported 45% to 53% for three attempts, and 51% to 71% to 80% for six attempts.
According to the 2021 National Summary Report compiled by the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART), the mean number of embryos transfers for patients achieving live birth go as follows:
Effective from 15 February 2021 the majority of Australian IVF clinics publish their individual success rate online via YourIVFSuccess.com.au. This site also contains a predictor tool.
The 2019 summary compiled by the SART the following data for non-donor eggs (first embryo transfer) in the United States:
In 2006, Canadian clinics reported an average pregnancy rate of 35%. A French study estimated that 66% of patients starting IVF treatment finally succeed in having a child (40% during the IVF treatment at the centre and 26% after IVF discontinuation). Achievement of having a child after IVF discontinuation was mainly due to adoption (46%) or spontaneous pregnancy (42%).
Biomarkers that affect the pregnancy chances of IVF include:
Other determinants of outcome of IVF include:
Aspirin is sometimes prescribed to people for the purpose of increasing the chances of conception by IVF, but there was no evidence to show that it is safe and effective.
A 2013 review and metaanalysis of randomised controlled trials of acupuncture as an adjuvant therapy in IVF found no overall benefit, and concluded that an apparent benefit detected in a subset of published trials where the control group (those not using acupuncture) experienced a lower than average rate of pregnancy requires further study, due to the possibility of publication bias and other factors.
A Cochrane review came to the result that Endometrium injury performed in the month prior to ovarian induction appeared to increase both the live birth rate and clinical pregnancy rate in IVF compared with no endometrial injury. There was no evidence of a difference between the groups in miscarriage, multiple pregnancy or bleeding rates. Evidence suggested that endometrial injury on the day of oocyte retrieval was associated with a lower live birth or ongoing pregnancy rate.
Intake of (such as N-acetyl-cysteine, melatonin, vitamin A, vitamin C, vitamin E, folic acid, myo-inositol, zinc or selenium) has not been associated with a significantly increased live birth rate or clinical pregnancy rate in IVF according to . The review found that oral antioxidants given to the sperm donor with male factor or unexplained subfertility may improve live birth rates, but more evidence is needed.
A Cochrane review in 2015 came to the result that there is no evidence identified regarding the effect of preconception lifestyle advice on the chance of a live birth outcome.
Ovarian hyperstimulation also includes suppression of spontaneous ovulation, for which two main methods are available: Using a (usually longer) GnRH agonist protocol or a (usually shorter) GnRH antagonist protocol. In a standard long GnRH agonist protocol the day when hyperstimulation treatment is started and the expected day of later oocyte retrieval can be chosen to conform to personal choice, while in a GnRH antagonist protocol it must be adapted to the spontaneous onset of the previous menstruation. On the other hand, the GnRH antagonist protocol has a lower risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), which is a life-threatening complication.
For the ovarian hyperstimulation in itself, injectable (usually FSH analogues) are generally used under close monitoring. Such monitoring frequently checks the estradiol level and, by means of gynecologic ultrasonography, follicular growth. Typically approximately 10 days of injections will be necessary.
When stimulating ovulation after suppressing endogenous secretion, it is necessary to supply exogenous gonadotropines. The most common one is the Menotropin (hMG), which is obtained by donation of menopausal women. Other pharmacological preparations are FSH+LH or coripholitropine alpha.
IVF using no drugs for ovarian hyperstimulation was the method for the conception of Louise Brown. This method can be successfully used when people want to avoid taking ovarian stimulating drugs with its associated side-effects. HFEA has estimated the live birth rate to be approximately 1.3% per IVF cycle using no hyperstimulation drugs for women aged between 40 and 42.
Mild IVF is a method where a small dose of ovarian stimulating drugs are used for a short duration during a natural menstrual cycle aimed at producing 2–7 eggs and creating healthy embryos. This method appears to be an advance in the field to reduce complications and side-effects for women, and it is aimed at quality, and not quantity of eggs and embryos. One study comparing a mild treatment (mild ovarian stimulation with GnRH antagonist co-treatment combined with single embryo transfer) to a standard treatment (stimulation with a GnRH agonist long-protocol and transfer of two embryos) came to the result that the proportions of cumulative pregnancies that resulted in term live birth after 1 year were 43.4% with mild treatment and 44.7% with standard treatment. Mild IVF can be cheaper than conventional IVF and with a significantly reduced risk of multiple birth and OHSS.
In gamete intrafallopian transfer, eggs are removed from the woman and placed in one of the fallopian tubes, along with the man's sperm. This allows fertilisation to take place inside the woman's body. Therefore, this variation is actually an in vivo fertilisation, not in vitro.
Still, as an expansion of IVF, patients who can benefit from PGS/PGD include:
PGS screens for numeral chromosomal abnormalities while PGD diagnosis the specific molecular defect of the inherited disease. In both PGS and PGD, individual cells from a pre-embryo, or preferably trophectoderm cells biopsied from a blastocyst, are analysed during the IVF process. Before the transfer of a pre-embryo back to a person's uterus, one or two cells are removed from the pre-embryos (8-cell stage), or preferably from a blastocyst. These cells are then evaluated for normality. Typically within one to two days, following completion of the evaluation, only the normal pre-embryos are transferred back to the uterus. Alternatively, a blastocyst can be cryopreserved via vitrification and transferred at a later date to the uterus. In addition, PGS can significantly reduce the risk of multiple pregnancies because fewer embryos, ideally just one, are needed for implantation.
The Rand Consulting Group has estimated there to be 400,000 frozen embryos in the United States in 2006. The advantage is that patients who fail to conceive may become pregnant using such embryos without having to go through a full IVF cycle. Or, if pregnancy occurred, they could return later for another pregnancy. Spare oocytes or embryos resulting from fertility treatments may be used for oocyte donation or embryo donation to another aspiring parent, and embryos may be created, frozen and stored specifically for transfer and donation by using donor eggs and sperm. Also, oocyte cryopreservation can be used for those who are likely to lose their ovarian reserve due to undergoing chemotherapy.
By 2017, many centres have adopted embryo cryopreservation as their primary IVF therapy, and perform few or no fresh embryo transfers. The two main reasons for this have been better endometrial receptivity when embryos are transferred in cycles without exposure to ovarian stimulation and also the ability to store the embryos while awaiting the results of preimplantation genetic testing.
The outcome from using cryopreserved embryos has uniformly been positive with no increase in birth defects or development abnormalities.
Epigenetic modifications caused by extended culture leading to the death of more female embryos has been theorised as the reason why blastocyst transfer leads to a higher male sex ratio; however, adding retinoic acid to the culture can bring this ratio back to normal. A second theory is that the male-biased sex ratio may due to a higher rate of selection of male embryos. Male embryos develop faster in vitro, and thus may appear more viable for transfer.
If the sperm donor has hepatitis B, The Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine advises that sperm washing is not necessary in IVF to prevent transmission, unless the birthing partner has not been effectively vaccinated. In women with hepatitis B, the risk of vertical transmission during IVF is no different from the risk in spontaneous conception. However, there is not enough evidence to say that ICSI procedures are safe in women with hepatitis B in regard to vertical transmission to the offspring.
Regarding potential spread of HIV/AIDS, Japan's government prohibited the use of IVF procedures in which both partners are infected with HIV. Despite the fact that the ethics committees previously allowed the Ogikubo, Tokyo Hospital, located in Tokyo, to use IVF for couples with HIV, the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan decided to block the practice. Hideji Hanabusa, the vice president of the Ogikubo Hospital, states that together with his colleagues, he managed to develop a method through which scientists are able to remove HIV from sperm.
In the United States, people seeking to be an embryo recipient undergo infectious disease screening required by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and reproductive tests to determine the best placement location and cycle timing before the actual embryo transfer occurs. The amount of screening the embryo has already undergone is largely dependent on the genetic parents' own IVF clinic and process. The embryo recipient may elect to have their own embryologist conduct further testing.
During egg retrieval, there exists a small chance of bleeding, infection, and damage to surrounding structures such as bowel and bladder (transvaginal ultrasound aspiration) as well as difficulty in breathing, chest infection, allergic reactions to medication, or nerve damage (laparoscopy).
Ectopic pregnancy may also occur if a fertilised egg develops outside the uterus, usually in the fallopian tubes and requires immediate destruction of the foetus.
IVF does not seem to be associated with an elevated risk of cervical cancer, nor with ovarian cancer or endometrial cancer when neutralising the confounder of infertility itself. Nor does it seem to impart any increased risk for breast cancer.
Regardless of pregnancy result, IVF treatment is usually stressful for patients. Neuroticism and the use of Escapism coping strategies are associated with a higher degree of distress, while the presence of social support has a relieving effect. A negative pregnancy test after IVF is associated with an increased risk for depression, but not with any increased risk of developing anxiety disorders. Pregnancy test results do not seem to be a risk factor for depression or anxiety among men in the case of relationships between two cisgender, heterosexual people. Hormone therapy such as gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH agonist) are associated with depression.
Studies show that there is an increased risk of venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism during the first trimester of IVF. When looking at long-term studies comparing patients who received or did not receive IVF, there seems to be no correlation with increased risk of cardiac events. There are more ongoing studies to solidify this.
Spontaneous pregnancy has occurred after successful and unsuccessful IVF treatments. Within 2 years of delivering an infant conceived through IVF, subfertile patients had a conception rate of 18%.
IVF does not seem to confer any risks regarding cognitive development, school performance, social functioning, and behaviour. Also, IVF infants are known to be as securely attached to their parents as those who were naturally conceived, and IVF adolescents are as well-adjusted as those who have been naturally conceived.
Limited long-term follow-up data suggest that IVF may be associated with an increased incidence of hypertension, impaired fasting glucose, increase in total body fat composition, advancement of bone age, subclinical thyroid disorder, early adulthood clinical depression and binge drinking in the offspring. It is not known, however, whether these potential associations are caused by the IVF procedure in itself, by adverse obstetric outcomes associated with IVF, by the genetic origin of the children or by yet unknown IVF-associated causes. Increases in embryo manipulation during IVF result in more deviant fetal growth curves, but birth weight does not seem to be a reliable marker of fetal stress.
IVF, including ICSI, is associated with an increased risk of imprinting disorders (including Prader–Willi syndrome and Angelman syndrome), with an odds ratio of 3.7 (95% confidence interval 1.4 to 9.7).
An IVF-associated incidence of cerebral palsy and neurodevelopmental delay are believed to be related to the of prematurity and low birthweight. Similarly, an IVF-associated incidence of autism and attention-deficit disorder are believed to be related to confounders of maternal and obstetric factors.
Overall, IVF does not cause an increased risk of childhood cancer. Studies have shown a decrease in the risk of certain cancers and an increased risks of certain others including retinoblastoma, hepatoblastoma and rhabdomyosarcoma.
While PGD was originally designed to screen for embryos carrying hereditary genetic diseases, the method has been applied to select features that are unrelated to diseases, thus raising ethical questions. Examples of such cases include the selection of embryos based on histocompatibility (HLA) for the donation of tissues to a sick family member, the diagnosis of genetic susceptibility to disease, and sex selection.
These examples raise ethical issues because of the morality of eugenics. It becomes frowned upon because of the advantage of being able to eliminate unwanted traits and selecting desired traits. By using PGD, individuals are given the opportunity to create a human life unethically and rely on science and not by natural selection.
For example, a deaf British couple, Tom and Paula Lichy, have petitioned to create a deaf baby using IVF. Some bioethics have been very critical of this approach. Jacob M. Appel wrote that "intentionally culling out blind or deaf embryos might prevent considerable future suffering, while a policy that allowed deaf or blind parents to select for such traits intentionally would be far more troublesome."
The industry has been accused of making unscientific claims, and distorting facts relating to infertility, in particular through widely exaggerated claims about how common infertility is in society, in an attempt to get as many couples as possible and as soon as possible to try treatments (rather than trying to conceive naturally for a longer time). This risks removing infertility from its social context and reducing the experience to a simple biological malfunction, which not only can be treated through bio-medical procedures, but should be treated by them.
Those conceiving at 40 have a greater risk of gestational hypertension and premature birth. The offspring is at risk when being born from older mothers, and the risks associated with being conceived through IVF.
Adriana Iliescu held the record for a while as the oldest woman to give birth using IVF and a donor egg, when she gave birth in 2004 at the age of 66. In September 2019, a 74-year-old woman became the oldest-ever to give birth after she delivered twins at a hospital in Guntur, Andhra Pradesh.
Ethical concerns include reproductive rights, the welfare of offspring, nondiscrimination against unmarried individuals, homosexual, and professional autonomy.
A controversy in California focused on the question of whether physicians opposed to same-sex relationships should be required to perform IVF for a lesbian couple. Guadalupe T. Benitez, a lesbian medical assistant from San Diego, sued doctors Christine Brody and Douglas Fenton of the North Coast Woman's Care Medical Group after Brody told her that she had "religious-based objections to treating her and homosexuals in general to help them conceive children by artificial insemination," and Fenton refused to authorise a refill of her prescription for the fertility drug Clomid on the same grounds. The California Medical Association had initially sided with Brody and Fenton, but the case, North Coast Women's Care Medical Group v. Superior Court, was decided unanimously by the California State Supreme Court in favour of Benitez on 19 August 2008.
Nadya Suleman came to international attention after having twelve embryos implanted, eight of which survived, resulting in eight newborns being added to her existing six-child family. The Medical Board of California sought to have fertility doctor Michael Kamrava, who treated Suleman, stripped of his licence. State officials allege that performing Suleman's procedure is evidence of unreasonable judgment, substandard care, and a lack of concern for the eight children she would conceive and the six she was already struggling to raise. On 1 June 2011 the Medical Board issued a ruling that Kamrava's medical licence be revoked effective 1 July 2011.
Transgender men can experience challenges in pregnancy and birthing from the cis-normative structure within the medical system, as well as psychological challenges such as renewed gender dysphoria.. The effect of continued testosterone therapy during pregnancy and breastfeeding is undetermined.. Ethical concerns include reproductive rights, reproductive justice, physician autonomy, and transphobia within the health care setting.
In the UK, Sweden, Norway, Germany, Italy, New Zealand, and some Australian states, donors are not paid and cannot be anonymous.
In 2000, a website called Donor Sibling Registry was created to help biological children with a common donor connect with each other.
In embryo donation, these extra embryos are given to others for Embryo transfer, with the goal of producing a successful pregnancy. Embryo recipients have genetic issues or poor-quality embryos or eggs of their own. The resulting child is considered the child of whoever birthed them, and not the child of the donor, the same as occurs with egg donor or sperm donation. As per The National Infertility Association, typically, genetic parents donate the eggs or embryos to a fertility clinic where they are preserved by oocyte cryopreservation or embryo cryopreservation until a carrier is found for them. The process of matching the donation with the prospective parents is conducted by the agency itself, at which time the clinic transfers ownership of the embryos to the prospective parent(s).
Alternatives to donating unused embryos are destroying them (or having them embryo transfer at a time when pregnancy is very unlikely), keeping them frozen indefinitely, or donating them for use in research (rendering them non-viable). Individual moral views on disposing of leftover embryos may depend on personal views on the beginning of human personhood and the definition and/or value of potential person, and on the value that is given to fundamental research questions. Some people believe donation of leftover embryos for research is a good alternative to discarding the embryos when patients receive proper, honest and clear information about the research project, the procedures and the scientific values.
During the embryo selection and transfer phases, many embryos may be discarded in favour of others. This selection may be based on criteria such as genetic disorders or the sex. One of the earliest cases of special gene selection through IVF was the case of the Collins family in the 1990s, who selected the sex of their child.
The ethic issues remain unresolved as no worldwide consensus exists in science, religion, and philosophy on when a human embryo should be recognised as a person. For those who believe that this is at the moment of conception, IVF becomes a moral question when multiple eggs are fertilised, begin development, and only a few are chosen for uterus transfer.
If IVF were to involve the fertilisation of only a single egg, or at least only the number that will be embryo transfer, then this would not be an issue. However, this has the chance of increasing costs dramatically as only a few eggs can be attempted at a time. As a result, the couple must decide what to do with these extra embryos. Depending on their view of the embryo's humanity or the chance the couple will want to try to have another child, the couple has multiple options for dealing with these extra embryos. Couples can choose to keep them frozen, donate them to other infertile couples, thaw them, or donate them to medical research. Keeping them frozen costs money, donating them does not ensure they will survive, thawing them renders them immediately unviable, and medical research results in their termination. In the realm of medical research, the couple is not necessarily told what the embryos will be used for, and as a result, some can be used in stem cell research.
In February 2024, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled in LePage v. Center for Reproductive Medicine that cryopreserved embryos were "persons" or "extrauterine children". After Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2022), some antiabortionists had hoped to get a judgement that fetuses and embryos were "persons".
The Lutheran Council in the United States of America, organised by the Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod and parent bodies of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, produced an authoritative document on the issue of in-vitro fertilisation, which "unanimously concluded that IVF does not in and of itself violate the will of God as reflected in the Bible, when the wife’s egg and husband’s sperm are used" (LCUSA n.d.:31). The Lutheran Churches approve of artificial insemination by a husband (AIH), though representatives from the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod hold that such IVF is only unobjectionable if the sperm and egg come from husband and wife and all of the fertilised eggs are implanted in the womb of the wife. With regard to artificial insemination by a donor (AID), the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America teaches that it is a "cause for moral concern", while the Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod rejects it.
In the US, the pineapple has emerged as a symbol of IVF users, possibly because some people thought, without scientific evidence, that eating pineapple might slightly increase the success rate for the procedure.
The cost of IVF rather reflects the costliness of the underlying healthcare system than the regulatory or funding environment, and ranges, on average for a standard IVF cycle and in 2006 United States dollars, between $12,500 in the United States to $4,000 in Japan. In Ireland, IVF costs around €4,000, with fertility drugs, if required, costing up to €3,000. The cost per live birth is highest in the United States ($41,000) and United Kingdom ($40,000) and lowest in Scandinavia and Japan (both around $24,500).
The high cost of IVF is also a barrier to access for disabled individuals, who typically have lower incomes, face higher health care costs, and seek health care services more often than non-disabled individuals.
Navigating insurance coverage for transgender expectant parents presents a unique challenge. Insurance plans are designed to cater towards a specific population, meaning that some plans can provide adequate coverage for gender-affirming care but fail to provide fertility services for transgender patients. Additionally, insurance coverage is constructed around a person's legally recognised sex and not their anatomy; thus, transgender people may not get coverage for the services they need, including transgender men for fertility services.
Many transgender people retain their original sex organs and choose to have children through biological reproduction. Advances in assisted reproductive technology and fertility preservation have broadened the options transgender people have to conceive a child using their own gametes or a donor's. Transgender men and women may opt for fertility preservation before any gender affirming surgery, but it is not required for future biological reproduction. It is also recommended that fertility preservation is conducted before any hormone therapy. Additionally, while fertility specialists often suggest that transgender men discontinue their testosterone hormones prior to pregnancy, research on this topic is still inconclusive. However, a 2019 study found that transgender male patients seeking oocyte retrieval via assisted reproductive technology (including IVF) were able to undergo treatment four months after stopping testosterone treatment, on average. All patients experienced menses and normal AMH, FSH and E2 levels and antral follicle counts after coming off testosterone, which allowed for successful oocyte retrieval. Despite assumptions that the long-term androgen treatment negatively impacts fertility, oocyte retrieval, an integral part of the IVF process, does not appear to be affected.
Biological reproductive options available to transgender women include, but are not limited to, IVF and IUI with the trans woman's sperm and a donor or a partner's eggs and uterus. Fertility treatment options for transgender men include, but are not limited to, IUI or IVF using his own eggs with a donor's sperm and/or donor's eggs, his uterus, or a different uterus, whether that is a partner's or a surrogate's.
Not only do misconceptions about disabled individuals parenting ability, sexuality, and health restrict and hinder access to fertility treatment such as IVF, structural barriers such as providers uneducated in disability healthcare and inaccessible clinics severely hinder disabled individuals access to receiving IVF.
New Brunswick provides partial funding through their Infertility Special Assistance Fund – a one time grant of up to $5,000. Patients may only claim up to 50% of treatment costs or $5,000 (whichever is less) occurred after April 2014. Eligible patients must be a full-time New Brunswick resident with a valid Medicare card and have an official medical infertility diagnosis by a physician.
In December 2015, the Ontario provincial government enacted the Ontario Fertility Program for patients with medical and non-medical infertility, regardless of sexual orientation, gender or family composition. Eligible patients for IVF treatment must be Ontario residents under the age of 43 and have a valid Ontario Health Insurance Plan card and have not already undergone any IVF cycles. Coverage is extensive, but not universal. Coverage extends to certain blood and urine tests, physician/nurse counselling and consultations, certain ultrasounds, up to two cycle monitorings, embryo thawing, freezing and culture, fertilisation and embryology services, single transfers of all embryos, and one surgical sperm retrieval using certain techniques only if necessary. Drugs and medications are not covered under this Program, along with psychologist or social worker counselling, storage and shipping of eggs, sperm or embryos, and the purchase of donor sperm or eggs.
Croatia
No egg or sperm donations take place in Croatia, however using donated sperm or egg in ART and IUI is allowed. With donated eggs, sperm or embryo, a heterosexual couple and single women have legal access to IVF. Male or female couples do not have access to ART as a form of reproduction. The minimum age for males and females to access ART in Croatia is 18 there is no maximum age. Donor anonymity applies, but the born child can be given access to the donor's identity at a certain age
IVF increasingly appears on NHS treatments blacklists. In August 2017 five of the 208 CCGs had stopped funding IVF completely and others were considering doing so. By October 2017 only 25 CCGs were delivering the three recommended NHS IVF cycles to eligible people under 40. Policies could fall foul of discrimination laws if they treat same sex couples differently from heterosexual ones. In July 2019 Jackie Doyle-Price said that women were registering with surgeries further away from their own home in order to get around CCG rationing policies.
The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority said in September 2018 that parents who are limited to one cycle of IVF, or have to fund it themselves, are more likely choose to implant multiple embryos in the hope it increases the chances of pregnancy. This significantly increases the chance of multiple births and the associated poor outcomes, which would increase NHS costs. The president of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists said that funding 3 cycles was "the most important factor in maintaining low rates of multiple pregnancies and reduce(s) associated complications".
In the US, as of September 2023, 21 states and the District of Columbia had passed laws for fertility insurance coverage. In 15 of those jurisdictions, some level of IVF coverage is included, and in 17, some fertility preservation services are included. Eleven states require coverage for both fertility preservation and IVF: Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Utah, and Washington D.C. The states that have infertility coverage laws are Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia. As of July 2023, New York was reportedly the only state Medicaid program to cover IVF. These laws differ by state but many require an egg be fertilised with sperm from a spouse and that in order to be covered you must show you cannot become pregnant through penile-vaginal sex. These requirements are not possible for a same-sex couple to meet.
Many fertility clinics in the United States limit the upper age at which people are eligible for IVF to 50 or 55 years. These cut-offs make it difficult for people older than fifty-five to utilise the procedure.
In India, the use of IVF as a means of sex selection (preimplantation genetic diagnosis) is banned under the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act, 1994.
Sunni Muslim nations generally allow IVF between married couples when conducted with their own respective sperm and eggs, but not with donor eggs from other couples. But Iran, which is Shi'a Muslim, has a more complex scheme. Iran bans sperm donation but allows donation of both fertilised and unfertilised eggs. Fertilised eggs are donated from married couples to other married couples, while unfertilised eggs are donated in the context of mut'ah or temporary marriage to the father.
By 2012 Costa Rica was the only country in the world with a complete ban on IVF technology, it having been ruled unconstitutional by the nation's Supreme Court because it "violated life." Costa Rica had been the only country in the western hemisphere that forbade IVF. A law project sent reluctantly by the government of President Laura Chinchilla was rejected by parliament. President Chinchilla has not publicly stated her position on the question of IVF. However, given the massive influence of the Catholic Church in her government any change in the status quo seems very unlikely. In spite of Costa Rican government and strong religious opposition, the IVF ban has been struck down by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in a decision of 20 December 2012. The court said that a long-standing Costa Rican guarantee of protection for every human embryo violated the reproductive freedom of infertile couples because it prohibited them from using IVF, which often involves the disposal of embryos not implanted in a woman's uterus. On 10 September 2015, President Luis Guillermo Solís signed a decree legalising in-vitro fertilisation. The decree was added to the country's official gazette on 11 September. Opponents of the practice have since filed a lawsuit before the country's Constitutional Court.
All major restrictions on single but infertile people using IVF were lifted in Australia in 2002 after a final appeal to the Australian High Court was rejected on procedural grounds in the Leesa Meldrum case. A Victorian federal court had ruled in 2000 that the existing ban on all single women and lesbians using IVF constituted sex discrimination. Victoria's government announced changes to its IVF law in 2007 eliminating remaining restrictions on fertile single women and lesbians, leaving South Australia as the only state maintaining them.
In 2023, the Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) updated its guidelines for the definition of “infertility” to include those who need medical interventions “in order to achieve a successful pregnancy either as an individual or with a partner.” In many states, legal and financial decisions about provision of infertility treatments reference this “official” definition. On September 29, 2024, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed SB 729, legislation which aligns with the ASRM definition of “infertility”.
In the United States, much of the opposition to the use of IVF is associated with the anti-abortion movement, evangelicals, and denominations such as the Southern Baptists. Current legal opposition to IVF and other fertility treatment access has stemmed from recent court rulings regarding women's reproductive healthcare. In the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision which had federally protected the right to abortion. The 2024 Alabama Supreme Court decision regarding IVF has since threatened IVF access and legality in the U.S. Frozen embryos at an IVF clinic were accidentally destroyed resulting in a lawsuit during which the attorneys for the plaintiff sought damages under the Wrongful Death of a Minor Act. The court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, setting a state-level precedent that embryos and fetuses are given the same rights as minors/children, regardless of whether they are in utero or not. This has created confusion over the status of unused embryos and questions surrounding when life begins. After the court's decision, numerous IVF clinics in Alabama halted IVF treatment services for fears of civil and criminal liability associated with the new rights granted to embryos. Since, laws proposing embryonic personhood have been proposed in 13 other states, creating fear of further state restrictions. This ruling raised concerns from The National Infertility Association and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine that the decision would mean Alabama's bans on abortion prohibit IVF as well, while the University of Alabama at Birmingham health system paused IVF treatments. Eight days later the Alabama legislature voted to protect IVF providers and patients from criminal or civil liability.
The Right to IVF Act, federal legislation that would have codified a right to fertility treatments and provided insurance coverage for in vitro fertilisation treatments, was twice brought to a vote in the Senate in 2024. Both times it was blocked by Senate Republicans, of whom only Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins voted to move the bill forward.
Few American courts have addressed the issue of the "property" status of a frozen embryo. This issue might arise in the context of a divorce case, in which a court would need to determine which spouse would be able to decide the disposition of the embryos. It could also arise in the context of a dispute between a sperm donor and egg donor, even if they were unmarried. In 2015, an Illinois court held that such disputes could be decided by reference to any contract between the parents-to-be. In the absence of a contract, the court would weigh the relative interests of the parties.
On February 18, 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order which, according to the White House website, "directs policy recommendations to protect IVF access and aggressively reduce out-of-pocket and health plan costs for such treatments". Trump has expressed support for IVF programs in the past, aiming to reduce the cost of such procedures.
1.10
Pregnancy rate
19.1 8.5 15.5 6.3
Miscarriage rate
Predictors of success
Method
Ovarian hyperstimulation
Natural IVF
Final maturation induction
Egg retrieval
Egg and sperm preparation
Co-incubation
Embryo culture
Embryo selection
Embryo transfer
Luteal support
Expansions
Preimplantation genetic screening or diagnosis
Cryopreservation
Other expansions
Complications and health effects
Multiple births
Sex ratio distortions
Spread of infectious disease
Other risks to the egg provider/retriever
Birth defects
+ Risk in singleton pregnancies resulting from IVF (with or without ICSI) 1.33–2.09 2.30–2.69 1.39–1.59 1.07–1.26 1.51–1.60 1.33–1.66 1.10–1.28 1.27–1.53 1.47–1.62 1.56–1.75 1.48–2.37
Other risks to the offspring
Controversial cases
Mix-ups
Preimplantation genetic diagnosis or screening
Industry corruption
Older patients
Pregnancy after menopause
Same-sex couples, single and unmarried parents
Transgender parents
Anonymous donors
Leftover embryos or eggs, unwanted embryos
Religious response
Christianity
Islam
Judaism
Society and culture
Emotional involvement with children
Men and IVF
Ability to withdraw consent
Availability and utilisation
Cost
Use by LGBT individuals
Same-sex couples
Transgender parents
Use by disabled individuals
By country
Australia
Cameroon
Canada
China
India
Israel
Sweden
United Kingdom
United States
Legal status
United States
Alternatives
See also
Further reading
External links
|
|