\n<\/p>\n
Since the Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade<\/a>, medical and legal experts have busied themselves examining how state abortion bans or trigger laws may have ripple effects on healthcare beyond direct abortions. One of those overlooked but adjacent areas is in vitro fertilization (IVF), the series of procedures used to help people conceive a child by retrieving eggs from a woman\u2019s ovaries and fertilizing them in a lab.<\/p>\n A recent American Society for Reproductive Medicine<\/a> (ASRM) report<\/a> outlined state abortion trigger laws in the aftermath of the Supreme Court decision and how they might restrict reproductive care. Although no legislation explicitly restricted or banned certain IVF procedures, there\u2019s a grey area around some of the implications of the language used in anti-abortion laws.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u201cThe impact of these laws will vary state-by-state and often hinge on things such as how terms like \u2018fertilization\u2019 and \u2018unborn child\u2019 are defined and used,\u201d the authors wrote. \u201cFor example, in some states, the law defines life as beginning at any point after fertilization. This has potential implications for those practicing IVF.\u201d<\/p>\n According to Dr. Arthur Caplan<\/a>, head of medical ethics at NYU Grossman School of Medicine<\/a>, there are three main ways IVF could be impacted by such laws. The first is the language around conception \u2014 and whether an embryo is considered a person.<\/p>\n In IVF, the goal is to develop as many healthy embryos as possible to ensure a successful pregnancy. This over-production of embryos is important to create a higher probability of implanting healthy ones, boosting the likelihood of having a child.<\/p>\n Once some of those embryos are implanted, the others are left behind. Individuals can choose to freeze or discard them. \u201cBut in states that don\u2019t allow abortion, they might say you can\u2019t destroy embryos,\u201d Caplan warned.<\/p>\n If such a policy were introduced and enforced, it could lead to doctors making a more limited number of embryos to implant \u2014 which could greatly reduce the chance of having a baby via IVF.<\/p>\n The second way IVF could be impacted has to do with destroying embryos that may have markers for severe genetic diseases. Currently embryos are screened to make sure they\u2019re not at risk of developing certain diseases. Those at risk are typically discarded to make room for healthier ones.<\/p>\n \u201cThat would be imperiled if people say you can\u2019t destroy embryos that have defects,\u201d Caplan noted.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, among women who experience multiple pregnancies as a result of IVF, some choose to abort one \u2014 or several \u2014 to protect the mother\u2019s health.<\/p>\n \u201cAllowing multiple pregnancies could risk the health of the mother. For some women, the womb can support no more than three babies at a time, for example,\u201d Caplan explained.<\/p>\n The fourth area where such laws may have an impact, though these cases are more rare, are uterine transplants. If there\u2019s an embryo in a uterus when it needs to be taken out, it could technically be considered an abortion.<\/p>\n In the future, such laws \u201ccould have a big impact on IVF and reproductive tech,\u201d Caplan explained. \u201cIt\u2019s ironic because IVF is more of a pro-life creation community. What they\u2019re doing is trying to make babies.\u201d<\/p>\n Most anti-abortion advocates note there\u2019s no real interest in creating laws that would restrict IVF. Their focus is primarily on women already pregnant, rather than embryos developed in a lab.<\/p>\n But in the last year, Republican lawmakers in around 10 states have proposed bills that would give frozen embryos legal \u201cpersonhood\u201d status, according to The New York Times<\/a>. Those laws haven\u2019t passed \u2014 but fueled by the Supreme Court\u2019s ruling in Roe v. Wade, other anti-abortion advocates have begun to considering pushing \u201cpersonhood\u201d laws even further.<\/p>\n Caplan, meanwhile, believes that most people in the IVF industry will continue operating as normal.<\/p>\n \u201cThey\u2019ll keep doing what they\u2019re doing and hoping nobody notices,\u201d he said. \u201cIn the world of IVF, you\u2019re working with people who want to have children. It\u2019s very pro-life. The chance of people ratting you out or blowing the whistle to a prosecutor is much lower.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n