Assisted reproduction. Past, present and future in the Bioethics debate
Keywords:
Bioethics, Bioethical debate, assisted reproduction, assisted reproduction in humansAbstract
Assisted reproductive techniques provided a solution to one of the most distressing medical problems: infertility, but at the same time they implied multiple problems from the bioethical point of view during its scientific evolution. For this reason, the authors set the objective of the present review: to identify the bioethical dilemmas that arise in the practice of assisted reproduction. 29 scientific articles and one doctoral thesis were reviewed. The bioethical bases contributed to the solution of these problems and in some cases to deny the application of some techniques. It was concluded that the ethical dilemma in assisted reproduction has different aspects from which to develop and absolutism is a position that the doctor cannot afford to have; each new aspect has to be analyzed with the necessary scientific basis, always preserving patient´s health and integrity.Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
1. Heredia-Carrasco A. Aspectos psicológicos relacionados con la reproducción asistida: de la fecundidad in vitro hasta la donación de gametos [Tesis]. Granada, España: Universidad de Granada; 2020. Disponible en: https://digibug.ugr.es/handle/10481/59848
2. Romero B, Antonio Castilla J. Análisis de los indicadores de calidad entre los diferentes centros públicos españoles en técnicas de reproducción asistida; benchmarking. ScienceDirect [Internet]. 2020 [citado 2021 Ene 28]; 7(2):51-59. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medre.2019.12.001
3. Fadare J, Adeniyi A. Ethical issues in newer assisted reproductive technologies: A view from Nigeri. NJCP [Internet]. 2020 [citado 2020 Nov 15]; 12(3):57-61. Disponible en: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26620623/
4. Klitzman R. How much is a child worth? Providers' and patients' views and responses concerning ethical and policy challenges in paying for ART. PLoS One [Internet]. 2017 [citado 2020 Nov 27]; 12(2):1-25. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0171939
5. O'Donovan L. Pushing the boundaries: Uterine transplantation and the limits of reproductive autonomy. Bioethics [Internet]. 2018 [citado 2020 Nov 26]; 32(8):489-498. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12531
6. Guntram L, Jane Williams N. Positioning uterus transplantation as a 'more ethical' alternative to surrogacy: Exploring symmetries between uterus transplantation and surrogacy through analysis of a Swedish government white paper. Bioethics [Internet]. 2018 [citado 2020 Nov 26]; 32(8):509-518. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12469
7. Camporesi S. Bioethics and Biopolitics: Presents and Futures of Reproduction. JBioethInq [Internet]. 2017 [citado 2020 Nov 26]; 14(2):177-181. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-017-9787-8
8. Cutas D, Smajdor A . "I am Your Mother and Your Father!" In Vitro Derived Gametes and the Ethics of Solo Reproduction. Springer [Internet]. 2017 [citado 2020 Nov 26]; 25(4):354-369. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-016-0321-7
9. Condat A, Mendes N, Drouineaud V, Gründler N, Lagrange C, Chiland C et. al. Biotechnologies that empower transgender persons to self-actualize as individuals, partners, spouses, and parents are defining new ways to conceive a child: psychological considerations and ethical issues . BMC [Internet]. 2018 [citado 2020 Nov 24]; 13(1):1-11. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13010-018-0054-3
10. Moadie V. Reflexión crítica sobre el principio de anonimidad en los datos del donante en procedimientos de técnicas de reproducción humana asistida heterólogas. RevSCL [Internet]. 2020 [citado 2020 Nov 25]; 15(1):40-53. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.18041/2382-3240/saber.2020v15n1.6288
11. Vizcaíno-Alonso Md, Montero-Vizcaíno YY, Alcorta-Rodríguez TM, Montero-Vizcaíno Y, de Vales-Linares MJ. Dilemas bioéticos en los procederes asistenciales en la reasignación sexual y reproducción asistida. InvestMedicoquir [Internet]. 2020 [citado 2020 Nov 28]; 12(3):1-14. Disponible en: http://www.revcimeq.sld.cu/index.php/imq/article/view/65
12. Rodríguez W, Soto-Ortigoza M. Bioética: salud de la cultura existencial. RevAcademic [Internet]. 2020 [citado 2021 Ene 28]; 4(1):145-156. Disponible en: http://revistas.ulatina.edu.pa/index.php/genteclave/article/view/125
13. Laurentino dos Santos I. Igualdad, equidad y justicia en la salud a la luz de la bioética. Rev.Bioét [Internet]. 2020 [citado 2021 Ene 28]; 28(2):229-238. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-80422020282384
14. de Azevedo Della Giustina TB, Nunes R. Bioética: una brújula para guiar nuestro camino. Rev. Bioét [Internet]. 2020 [citado 2021 Ene 28]; 28(3):407-409. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-80422020283000
15. Taboada Lugo N. Consideraciones éticas en el diagnóstico prenatal y el asesoramiento genético. Rev Hum Med [Internet]. 2017 [citado 2020 Nov 27]; 17(1):2-16. Disponible en: http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1727-81202017000100002&lng=es.
16. Cárdenas Giraudy AG. Ética, Bioética y método clínico en el tratamiento de pacientes pediátricos aquejados de migraña. Rev Cubana Pediatr [Internet]. 2016 [citado 2020 Nov 27]; 88(2):214-222. Disponible en: http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-75312016000200010&lng=es
17. Bladilo A, de la Torre N, Herrera M. Las técnicas de reproducción humana asistida desde los derechos humanos como perspectiva obligada de análisis. Revista IUS [Internet]. 2017 [citado 2020 Nov 27]; 11(39):1-29. Disponible en: http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1870-21472017000100002&lng=es&tlng=es
18. Palacios-González C. Are there moral differences between maternal spindle transfer and pronuclear transfer? Springer [Internet]. 2017 [citado 2020 Nov 27]; 20(4):503-511. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-017-9772-3
19. Johnson M. Human in vitro fertilization and developmental biology: a mutually influential history. TheCompaBiolo [Internet]. 2019 [citado 2020 Nov 23]; 146(2):1-10. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.183145
20. Klitzman R. Buying and selling human eggs: infertility providers' ethical and other concerns regarding egg donor agencies.. BMC [Internet]. 2016 [citado 2020 Nov 24]; 17(71):1-10. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-016-0151-z
21. Klitzman R. Unconventional combinations of prospective parents: ethical challenges faced by IVF providers. BMC [Internet]. 2017 [citado 2020 Nov 23]; 18(18):1-13. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-017-0177-x
22. Ventura-Juncán P, Irarrázaval I, Rolle A, Gutiérrez J, Moreno R, Santos M et al. In vitro fertilization (IVF) in mammals: epigenetic and developmental alterations. Scientific and bioethical implications for IVF in human. BMC [Internet]. 2015 [citado 2020 Nov 23]; 48(68):1-13. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40659-015-0059-y
23. Vardit R. The right to know one's genetic origins and cross-border medically assisted reproduction. BMC [Internet]. 2017 [citado 2020 Nov 25]; 6(3):1-6. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13584-016-0125-0
24. Shalev C, Moreno A, Eya H, Leibel M, Schuz R, Eldar-Geva T. Ethics and regulation of inter-country medically assisted reproduction: a call for action. BMC [Internet]. 2016 [citado 2020 Nov 23]; 5(59):1-12. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13584-016-0117-0
25. Annelien B, Insoo H. Ethics of stem cell? derived gametes made in a dish: fertility for everyone?. EMBO [Internet]. 2017 [citado 2020 Nov 20]; 9(4):396-398. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.15252/emmm.201607291
26. Palacios-González C. Ethical aspects of creating human-nonhuman chimeras capable of human gamete production and human pregnancy. Springer [Internet]. 2015 [citado 2020 Nov 23]; 33(5):181-202. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-015-0031-1
27. Borges de Souza MM, de Azevedo Antunes R, Allemand Mancebo AC. Abandoned embryos in Brazil: advances in the decisions. Are we there yet? JBRA Assist Reprod [Internet]. 2018 [citado 2020 Nov 19]; 22(2):76-77. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.5935/1518-0557.20180038
28. Ramstein I, Halpern J, Gadzinski A, Brannigan R, Smith J. Ethical, moral, and theological insights into advances in male pediatric and adolescent fertility preservation. Andrology [Internet]. 2017 [citado 2020 Nov 15]; 4(5):631-639. Disponible en: https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/andr.12371
29. Simopoulou M, Sfakianoudis K, Bakas P, Giannelou P, Papapetrou C, Kalampokas T et. al. Postponing Pregnancy Through Oocyte Cryopreservation for Social Reasons: Considerations Regarding Clinical Practice and the Socio-Psychological and Bioethical Issues Involved. MDPI [Internet]. 2018 [citado 2020 Nov 18]; 54(4):1-19. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina54050076
30. López Catá FJ, Sabourín Divé J, Matos Santisteban MA, Aguilar Iraola IJ. Revisión sobre el uso de la reproducción asistida en la prevención de enfermedades mitocondriales. Cibamax [Internet]. 2020 [citado 2020 Nov 28]; 1(1):1-16. Disponible en: http://www.cibmanz2020.sld.cu/index.php./cibamanz/cibamanz2020/paper/viewPaper/545
2. Romero B, Antonio Castilla J. Análisis de los indicadores de calidad entre los diferentes centros públicos españoles en técnicas de reproducción asistida; benchmarking. ScienceDirect [Internet]. 2020 [citado 2021 Ene 28]; 7(2):51-59. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medre.2019.12.001
3. Fadare J, Adeniyi A. Ethical issues in newer assisted reproductive technologies: A view from Nigeri. NJCP [Internet]. 2020 [citado 2020 Nov 15]; 12(3):57-61. Disponible en: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26620623/
4. Klitzman R. How much is a child worth? Providers' and patients' views and responses concerning ethical and policy challenges in paying for ART. PLoS One [Internet]. 2017 [citado 2020 Nov 27]; 12(2):1-25. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0171939
5. O'Donovan L. Pushing the boundaries: Uterine transplantation and the limits of reproductive autonomy. Bioethics [Internet]. 2018 [citado 2020 Nov 26]; 32(8):489-498. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12531
6. Guntram L, Jane Williams N. Positioning uterus transplantation as a 'more ethical' alternative to surrogacy: Exploring symmetries between uterus transplantation and surrogacy through analysis of a Swedish government white paper. Bioethics [Internet]. 2018 [citado 2020 Nov 26]; 32(8):509-518. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12469
7. Camporesi S. Bioethics and Biopolitics: Presents and Futures of Reproduction. JBioethInq [Internet]. 2017 [citado 2020 Nov 26]; 14(2):177-181. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-017-9787-8
8. Cutas D, Smajdor A . "I am Your Mother and Your Father!" In Vitro Derived Gametes and the Ethics of Solo Reproduction. Springer [Internet]. 2017 [citado 2020 Nov 26]; 25(4):354-369. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-016-0321-7
9. Condat A, Mendes N, Drouineaud V, Gründler N, Lagrange C, Chiland C et. al. Biotechnologies that empower transgender persons to self-actualize as individuals, partners, spouses, and parents are defining new ways to conceive a child: psychological considerations and ethical issues . BMC [Internet]. 2018 [citado 2020 Nov 24]; 13(1):1-11. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13010-018-0054-3
10. Moadie V. Reflexión crítica sobre el principio de anonimidad en los datos del donante en procedimientos de técnicas de reproducción humana asistida heterólogas. RevSCL [Internet]. 2020 [citado 2020 Nov 25]; 15(1):40-53. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.18041/2382-3240/saber.2020v15n1.6288
11. Vizcaíno-Alonso Md, Montero-Vizcaíno YY, Alcorta-Rodríguez TM, Montero-Vizcaíno Y, de Vales-Linares MJ. Dilemas bioéticos en los procederes asistenciales en la reasignación sexual y reproducción asistida. InvestMedicoquir [Internet]. 2020 [citado 2020 Nov 28]; 12(3):1-14. Disponible en: http://www.revcimeq.sld.cu/index.php/imq/article/view/65
12. Rodríguez W, Soto-Ortigoza M. Bioética: salud de la cultura existencial. RevAcademic [Internet]. 2020 [citado 2021 Ene 28]; 4(1):145-156. Disponible en: http://revistas.ulatina.edu.pa/index.php/genteclave/article/view/125
13. Laurentino dos Santos I. Igualdad, equidad y justicia en la salud a la luz de la bioética. Rev.Bioét [Internet]. 2020 [citado 2021 Ene 28]; 28(2):229-238. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-80422020282384
14. de Azevedo Della Giustina TB, Nunes R. Bioética: una brújula para guiar nuestro camino. Rev. Bioét [Internet]. 2020 [citado 2021 Ene 28]; 28(3):407-409. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-80422020283000
15. Taboada Lugo N. Consideraciones éticas en el diagnóstico prenatal y el asesoramiento genético. Rev Hum Med [Internet]. 2017 [citado 2020 Nov 27]; 17(1):2-16. Disponible en: http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1727-81202017000100002&lng=es.
16. Cárdenas Giraudy AG. Ética, Bioética y método clínico en el tratamiento de pacientes pediátricos aquejados de migraña. Rev Cubana Pediatr [Internet]. 2016 [citado 2020 Nov 27]; 88(2):214-222. Disponible en: http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-75312016000200010&lng=es
17. Bladilo A, de la Torre N, Herrera M. Las técnicas de reproducción humana asistida desde los derechos humanos como perspectiva obligada de análisis. Revista IUS [Internet]. 2017 [citado 2020 Nov 27]; 11(39):1-29. Disponible en: http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1870-21472017000100002&lng=es&tlng=es
18. Palacios-González C. Are there moral differences between maternal spindle transfer and pronuclear transfer? Springer [Internet]. 2017 [citado 2020 Nov 27]; 20(4):503-511. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-017-9772-3
19. Johnson M. Human in vitro fertilization and developmental biology: a mutually influential history. TheCompaBiolo [Internet]. 2019 [citado 2020 Nov 23]; 146(2):1-10. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.183145
20. Klitzman R. Buying and selling human eggs: infertility providers' ethical and other concerns regarding egg donor agencies.. BMC [Internet]. 2016 [citado 2020 Nov 24]; 17(71):1-10. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-016-0151-z
21. Klitzman R. Unconventional combinations of prospective parents: ethical challenges faced by IVF providers. BMC [Internet]. 2017 [citado 2020 Nov 23]; 18(18):1-13. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-017-0177-x
22. Ventura-Juncán P, Irarrázaval I, Rolle A, Gutiérrez J, Moreno R, Santos M et al. In vitro fertilization (IVF) in mammals: epigenetic and developmental alterations. Scientific and bioethical implications for IVF in human. BMC [Internet]. 2015 [citado 2020 Nov 23]; 48(68):1-13. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40659-015-0059-y
23. Vardit R. The right to know one's genetic origins and cross-border medically assisted reproduction. BMC [Internet]. 2017 [citado 2020 Nov 25]; 6(3):1-6. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13584-016-0125-0
24. Shalev C, Moreno A, Eya H, Leibel M, Schuz R, Eldar-Geva T. Ethics and regulation of inter-country medically assisted reproduction: a call for action. BMC [Internet]. 2016 [citado 2020 Nov 23]; 5(59):1-12. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13584-016-0117-0
25. Annelien B, Insoo H. Ethics of stem cell? derived gametes made in a dish: fertility for everyone?. EMBO [Internet]. 2017 [citado 2020 Nov 20]; 9(4):396-398. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.15252/emmm.201607291
26. Palacios-González C. Ethical aspects of creating human-nonhuman chimeras capable of human gamete production and human pregnancy. Springer [Internet]. 2015 [citado 2020 Nov 23]; 33(5):181-202. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-015-0031-1
27. Borges de Souza MM, de Azevedo Antunes R, Allemand Mancebo AC. Abandoned embryos in Brazil: advances in the decisions. Are we there yet? JBRA Assist Reprod [Internet]. 2018 [citado 2020 Nov 19]; 22(2):76-77. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.5935/1518-0557.20180038
28. Ramstein I, Halpern J, Gadzinski A, Brannigan R, Smith J. Ethical, moral, and theological insights into advances in male pediatric and adolescent fertility preservation. Andrology [Internet]. 2017 [citado 2020 Nov 15]; 4(5):631-639. Disponible en: https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/andr.12371
29. Simopoulou M, Sfakianoudis K, Bakas P, Giannelou P, Papapetrou C, Kalampokas T et. al. Postponing Pregnancy Through Oocyte Cryopreservation for Social Reasons: Considerations Regarding Clinical Practice and the Socio-Psychological and Bioethical Issues Involved. MDPI [Internet]. 2018 [citado 2020 Nov 18]; 54(4):1-19. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina54050076
30. López Catá FJ, Sabourín Divé J, Matos Santisteban MA, Aguilar Iraola IJ. Revisión sobre el uso de la reproducción asistida en la prevención de enfermedades mitocondriales. Cibamax [Internet]. 2020 [citado 2020 Nov 28]; 1(1):1-16. Disponible en: http://www.cibmanz2020.sld.cu/index.php./cibamanz/cibamanz2020/paper/viewPaper/545
Published
2021-05-19
How to Cite
1.
Jimenez-Franco LE, González-Cano N. Assisted reproduction. Past, present and future in the Bioethics debate. MedEst [Internet]. 2021 May 19 [cited 2025 Apr. 4];1(1):e47. Available from: https://revmedest.sld.cu/index.php/medest/article/view/47
Issue
Section
REVIEW ARTICLES
License
Those authors who have publications with this journal accept the following terms: The authors will retain their copyright and guarantee the journal the right of first publication of their work, which will be simultaneously subject to the Recognition License. Creative Commons that allows third parties to share the work as long as its author and its first publication in this magazine are indicated. Authors may adopt other non-exclusive license agreements for the distribution of the published version of the work (e.g.: deposit it in an institutional telematic archive or publish it in a monographic volume) as long as the initial publication in this journal is indicated. Authors are allowed and recommended to disseminate their work through the Internet (e.g.: in institutional telematic archives or on your website) before and during the submission process, which can produce interesting exchanges and increase citations of the published work.
