UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA ENUGU

CAMPUS

FACULTY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS MANAGEMENT

A TERM PAPER WRITTEN IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF

THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE COURSE NATURAL
SCIENCE (GSP 106)
TOPIC:
ASSISTED REPRODUCTIVE TECHNOLOGIES :THE
ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

NAME: MIRIKWE IFEOLUWAPO FAITH

REG. NUMBER: 2022/243244

MARCH, 2024
INTRODUCTION
DEFINITION OF REPRODUCTIVE TECHNOLOGIES (ARTs)
Assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) refer to a range of medical
procedures that help individuals or couples achieve pregnancy when they
are facing difficulties conceiving naturally. These technologies have
revolutionized modern reproductive medicine and have provided hope to
many people who may have otherwise struggled to have children.

Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ARTs) introduce several ethical

dilemmas. These include:

1. **Parental Intentions**: Questions arise concerning the rights and

intentions of parents, especially regarding selective embryo implantation or
genetic screening for desired traits.

2. **Embryo Selection**: Ethical concerns arise over embryo selection, such

as whether it's ethical to discard embryos with certain genetic conditions or
traits.

3. **Commercialization**: There's debate around the commercialization of

ARTs, including concerns about exploitation, accessibility, and the potential
for financial motives to influence decisions.

4. **Social Implications**: ARTs can exacerbate existing social inequalities,

raising questions about access to these technologies and the potential for
creating a 'designer baby' culture.

5. **Health Risks**: Ethical considerations include the risks associated with

ART procedures for both mothers and children, as well as the long-term
health implications for offspring conceived through these technologies.

6. **Surrogacy**: Surrogacy arrangements raise complex ethical questions

related to the autonomy and well-being of surrogate mothers, the rights of
intended parents, and the potential for exploitation.

Navigating these dilemmas involves balancing individual autonomy,

societal values, and considerations of justice and fairness.

THE PRINCIPLES OF AUTONOMY, BENEFICENCE,

NON-MALEFICENCE, AND JUSTICE AS THEY
APPLY TO ARTS
The principles of autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice are
fundamental ethical considerations in the context of Assisted Reproductive
Technologies (ARTs).

1. **Autonomy**: This principle emphasizes respecting the autonomy of

individuals involved in ART procedures. It involves ensuring that individuals
have the right to make informed decisions about their reproductive choices
without coercion or undue influence. This includes respecting the
autonomy of prospective parents in choosing whether to pursue ART, as
well as respecting the autonomy of donors, surrogate mothers, and others
involved in the process.

2. **Beneficence**: The principle of beneficence involves promoting the

well-being of individuals. In the context of ARTs, this means ensuring that
procedures are conducted with the intention of maximizing the benefits to
those involved, including prospective parents and potential offspring. This
may involve providing access to high-quality medical care, counseling
services, and support throughout the process.

3. **Non-maleficence**: Non-maleficence is the principle of doing no harm.

In the context of ARTs, this means minimizing the risks and potential
harms associated with procedures for both the individuals undergoing
treatment and any resulting offspring. This includes carefully considering
the physical, psychological, and social risks associated with various ART
techniques and taking steps to mitigate them.

4. **Justice**: The principle of justice involves ensuring fairness and equity

in the distribution of resources and opportunities. In the context of ARTs,
this includes considerations of access to treatment, affordability, and the
allocation of limited resources such as donor gametes and fertility clinics.
It also encompasses concerns about social justice, including addressing
disparities in access to ARTs based on factors such as income, geography,
and ethnicity.

By applying these principles, policymakers, healthcare professionals, and

individuals can navigate the complex ethical terrain surrounding ARTs in a
way that respects the rights and well-being of all involved parties.
THE ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS OF UNEQUAL ACCESS TO
ARTs BASED ON SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS,
GEOGRAPHY AND OTHER FACTORS
Unequal access to Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ARTs) based on
socioeconomic status, geography, and other factors raises significant
ethical concerns:

1. **Socioeconomic Status**:

- **Ethical Implications**: Limited access to ARTs due to financial

constraints can perpetuate socioeconomic disparities in reproductive
healthcare, as those with higher incomes have greater access to fertility
treatments. This raises concerns about fairness, justice, and the
exacerbation of existing inequalities.

- **Impact**: Socioeconomic disparities can result in unequal

opportunities for individuals or couples to pursue their reproductive goals,
potentially leading to feelings of injustice and frustration.

2. **Geography**:

- **Ethical Implications**: Disparities in access to ARTs based on

geographic location can result in unequal opportunities for individuals living
in rural or underserved areas, where fertility clinics may be scarce or
nonexistent. This raises concerns about distributive justice and the right to
equal access to healthcare services.

- **Impact**: Limited geographic access may force individuals to travel

long distances or incur additional expenses to access ART services, further
exacerbating disparities based on socioeconomic status.

3. **Other Factors**:
 - **Ethical Implications**: Disparities in access to ARTs based on factors
such as race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or insurance coverage raise
concerns about discrimination, social justice, and the equitable distribution
of healthcare resources.

- **Impact**: Individuals from marginalized or underrepresented groups

may face additional barriers to accessing ARTs, leading to feelings of
marginalization, exclusion, and injustice.

Addressing these ethical implications requires proactive measures to

promote equity and accessibility in reproductive healthcare, including:

- Implementing policies to ensure that ART services are affordable and

accessible to individuals of all socioeconomic backgrounds.

- Investing in infrastructure to expand access to fertility clinics in

underserved areas, particularly rural regions.

- Advocating for inclusive practices that recognize and address the unique
needs and challenges faced by individuals from marginalized or
disadvantaged groups.

- Promoting education and awareness about reproductive rights and the

ethical considerations surrounding ARTs to empower individuals to make
informed decisions about their reproductive healthcare options.

By addressing these ethical implications and promoting equitable access

to ARTs, societies can work towards ensuring that all individuals have the
opportunity to pursue their reproductive goals regardless of socioeconomic
status, geography, or other factors

STRATEGIES TO PROMOTE EQUITABLE ACCESS THE

ARTs WHILE ADDRESSING FINANCIAL, CULTURAL, AND
STRUCTURAL BARRIERS
Promoting equitable access to Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ARTs)
while addressing financial, cultural, and structural barriers requires a
multifaceted approach involving various strategies:

1. **Financial Support**:

- Establishing government-funded programs or subsidies to make ARTs

more affordable for individuals with limited financial means.

- Implementing insurance coverage mandates to ensure that fertility

treatments are covered by health insurance plans, reducing financial
barriers to access.

2. **Community Outreach and Education**:

- Providing comprehensive education and outreach programs to increase

awareness of ART options, debunk myths, and reduce stigma surrounding
infertility and reproductive treatments.

- Offering culturally sensitive and linguistically appropriate resources to

address cultural barriers and ensure that individuals from diverse
backgrounds have access to accurate information about ARTs.

3. **Telemedicine and Remote Services**:

- Expanding telemedicine and remote consultation services to reach

individuals in underserved or remote areas, reducing geographic barriers to
access.
 - Utilizing technology platforms to provide virtual support groups,
counseling services, and educational resources, enhancing accessibility for
individuals unable to access in-person services.

4. **Addressing Structural Inequities**:

- Advocating for policy changes to address systemic inequalities and

structural barriers that contribute to disparities in access to ARTs, such as
discriminatory practices, institutional biases, and inadequate healthcare
infrastructure.

- Investing in research and data collection to identify and address

disparities in access to ARTs based on socioeconomic status, geography,
race, ethnicity, and other factors, informing targeted interventions and
policy solutions.

5. **Collaboration and Partnerships**:

- Fostering collaboration between government agencies, healthcare

providers, advocacy organizations, and community stakeholders to develop
comprehensive strategies for promoting equitable access to ARTs.

- Partnering with academic institutions, professional associations, and

industry stakeholders to advance research, innovation, and best practices
in reproductive medicine and infertility treatment.

6. **Support Services and Counseling**:

- Providing holistic support services, including counseling, mental health

support, and financial assistance programs, to address the emotional,
psychological, and financial burdens associated with infertility and ART
treatments.
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES AND TRENDS IN
REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE AND THEIR POTENTIAL
ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS

One emerging technology in reproductive medicine is mitochondrial

replacement therapy (MRT), which involves replacing defective
mitochondria in eggs or embryos with healthy ones from a donor to prevent
the transmission of mitochondrial diseases. This technology holds promise
for preventing severe genetic disorders but raises ethical concerns
regarding the creation of embryos with genetic material from three
individuals.

Another trend is in vitro gametogenesis (IVG), a technique that allows the

creation of sperm and egg cells from pluripotent stem cells. IVG could offer
solutions for individuals with fertility issues or same-sex couples to
conceive biological offspring. However, it also raises ethical questions
about the potential for designer babies and the commodification of human
gametes.

Additionally, advancements in gene editing technologies like CRISPR-Cas9

present opportunities to correct genetic abnormalities in embryos or
enhance desirable traits. While these technologies offer the potential to
eradicate hereditary diseases, they also raise concerns about the ethical
implications of altering the human germline and the potential for
unintended consequences.
CONCLUSION
In summary, ethical considerations in assisted reproductive technologies
(ART) encompass various emerging advancements such as mitochondrial
replacement therapy (MRT), in vitro gametogenesis (IVG), and gene editing
tools like CRISPR-Cas9. While these technologies offer tremendous
potential for preventing genetic diseases and addressing fertility issues,
they also raise profound ethical concerns regarding the creation of
embryos with genetic material from multiple individuals, the potential for
designer babies, and altering the human germline. Moving forward, it is
imperative to carefully weigh the benefits against the ethical implications,
ensuring responsible and equitable application in society. This necessitates
ongoing dialogue, regulation, and ethical frameworks to guide the ethical
use of these technologies while upholding human dignity and rights.
REFERENCE
1. Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2019). Principles of biomedical
ethics. Oxford University Press.

2. Baylis, F. (2013). The ethics of creating children with three genetic

parents. Reproductive biomedicine online, 26(6), 531-534.

3. Dondorp, W., de Wert, G., Pennings, G., Shenfield, F., Devroey, P., Tarlatzis,
B., ... & ESHRE Task Force on Ethics and Law. (2013). Oocyte
cryopreservation for age-related fertility loss. Human reproduction, 28(6),
1626-1631.

4. Robertson, J. A. (2019). Children of choice: Freedom and the new

reproductive technologies. Princeton University Press.

5. Shenfield, F., Pennings, G., Cohen, J., Devroey, P., de Wert, G., Tarlatzis, B.,
... & ESHRE Taskforce on Ethics and Law. (2014). ESHRE's good practice
guide for cross-border reproductive care for centers and practitioners.
Human reproduction, 29(8), 1355-1359.

6. Blyth, E., & Landau, R. (2013). Third party assisted conception across
borders: An ethical dilemma. Journal of Medical Ethics, 39(4), 223-227.

7. Crockin, S. L., & Seibel, M. M. (2014). Assisted reproductive technology: A

lawyer's perspective. Fertility and Sterility, 101(5), 1204-1208..