Emily Rivers always envisioned a bustling household filled with children. Yet, as she and her partner embarked on their journey to parenthood, they encountered unforeseen hurdles. After successfully welcoming their first child through intrauterine insemination (IUI), Emily spent the next seven years trying to expand their family.
After 30 embryos, five heartbreaking miscarriages, three rounds of in vitro fertilization (IVF), two IUIs, and one frozen embryo transfer (FET), Emily and her partner found themselves without any viable pregnancies and chose to conclude their quest for a genetically-linked family. They are among the 1 in 8 couples who face infertility, a struggle shared by millions worldwide. Thankfully, advancements in reproductive technologies have provided many couples like Emily the opportunity to pursue their dreams of parenthood. However, these advancements are now jeopardized by state and federal “personhood” bills.
Since 2008, at least ten bills have been proposed at the state level with the intention of defining human life as beginning at conception. The infertility community has consistently rallied against these measures, fearing that establishing personhood could threaten reproductive medicine, and so far, every state-level bill has been defeated. However, with two personhood bills surfacing at the federal level this year, advocates for infertility treatment are preparing to fight once again for their rights to build families.
In 2009, the public became aware of Nadya Suleman, widely known as “Octomom,” who gave birth to eight children following the transfer of 12 embryos during IVF. This unusual case prompted a tightening of medical guidelines for embryo transfers, as well as legislative scrutiny far from her home state of California. Just two months after her children were born, Georgia introduced the “Ethical Treatment of Human Embryos Act,” which sought to limit the number of embryos that could be implanted at one time while also containing language defining personhood.
This was not the first attempt to establish personhood; Colorado had attempted a similar initiative in 2008. However, the Georgia bill was notable for incorporating personhood language into legislation unrelated to abortion. “The bill’s wording made it clear that the embryo was considered a human life with rights beyond those of the parents,” explained Dr. Mark Hastings, a reproductive endocrinologist in Atlanta. “It was a subtle attempt to introduce personhood into legislation.”
While personhood bills are primarily seen as measures to restrict abortion, experts caution that granting rights to embryos could also hinder those seeking infertility treatments. Dr. Ava Chen, a reproductive endocrinologist in Oklahoma City, has been at the forefront of advocacy efforts against such legislation. “Many supporters of these bills are unaware of the unintended consequences,” she stated. “Assigning embryos the same rights as adults not only aims to outlaw abortion but also places assisted reproductive technology at risk.”
Chen emphasized that only about 30% of embryos result in live births; the remainder either miscarry or fail to implant. Without the ability to consent to assisted reproductive technologies, various scenarios arise that could put unimplanted embryos in jeopardy. “No lab technician would want to risk being charged with murder for an accidental mishap in the lab,” she noted.
Moreover, the implications of personhood legislation could lead to significant changes in the practices of reproductive endocrinologists. Dr. Hastings, who worked to combat Georgia’s personhood bill, mentioned that IVF practices would likely revert to outdated methods if such legislation were enacted, severely hampering success rates and increasing costs for patients.
The potential for legal ramifications surrounding ectopic pregnancies—situations that threaten the health of the mother—compounds the confusion created by personhood bills. “What happens in cases of ectopic pregnancies where surgical intervention may be interpreted as taking a life?” Dr. Chen questioned.
These kinds of critical inquiries remain unanswered by existing personhood bills, most of which are vague and lack clear protections for those pursuing IVF. Barbara Collins, president of Resolve: The National Infertility Association, expressed skepticism that any personhood bill could adequately safeguard IVF practices. “I’ve never seen any effective protections included in such legislation,” she lamented.
In 2012, Virginia’s attempt to pass its own personhood bill encountered similar issues. “Despite attempts to include protections due to a committee member’s personal IVF experience, the final provisions were insufficient,” Collins recounted. The bill ultimately failed after passing through committee, but it highlighted the persistent risk of such legislation harming those with infertility.
Currently, two federal personhood bills are being considered—H.R.586 “Sanctity of Human Life Act” by Rep. Jody Hice (R-GA) and H.R.681 “Life at Conception Act” by Rep. Alexander Mooney (R-WV). Although their progress has been limited, their introduction, along with a combined 91 co-sponsors, raises significant concerns among advocates of infertility treatment.
“For me, navigating infertility felt like being repeatedly knocked down, only to rise again, knowing another blow was coming,” said Collins. “The thought of having to halt an IVF cycle, losing thousands of dollars in the process, is devastating.” Neither bill provides protections for those seeking infertility treatments; the only mention of IVF appears in H.R.586, indicating that life includes embryos created through any fertilization method, thereby granting them rights equal to their parents.
Emily Rivers summarized her feelings on this matter poignantly: “Infertility brought some of the most challenging moments of my life, and ultimately, we all just want the freedom to make medical decisions alongside our doctors—without politicians interfering and complicating an already stressful situation.”
For those who wish to explore more about home insemination options, check out the CryoBaby At Home Insemination Kit. This resource can aid in your journey towards parenthood, just like the 21-piece Home Insemination Kit for self insemination. Additionally, for more information on pregnancy, visit the World Health Organization’s pregnancy resource page.
In summary, the introduction of personhood bills could significantly limit access to IVF treatments for aspiring parents, leading to a regression in reproductive technology and increased challenges for those facing infertility. Advocates are mobilizing to protect their rights to pursue family-building options without undue legislative interference.
Keyphrase: Personhood bills and IVF access
Tags: [“home insemination kit” “home insemination syringe” “self insemination”]