» Articles » PMID: 29892725

IVF Global Histories, USA: Between Rock and a Marketplace

Overview
Date 2018 Jun 13
PMID 29892725
Citations 15
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The USA has played, and continues to play, a distinctive and significant part in the history of IVF and assisted reproductive technology worldwide. American IVF emerged in the scientific context of contraceptive and fertility research, in the social context of a wealthy nation without universal healthcare, and in the political context of the abortion debate and its impact on federal versus state funding and regulation. IVF had its first clinical success in the USA in 1981. Since then, IVF in the USA has become known for procedures involving third, fourth and fifth parties as gamete donors and surrogates. The USA has also been one of the pioneers in domestic and transnational deployment of IVF for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) parenthood, and a pioneer of the social egg-freezing revolution. US IVF has been marked by professional and patient advocacy for such things as the honest reporting of success rates, recognition of the risks of postponed childbearing, and the need for insurance coverage. Certain landmark legal custody disputes over IVF embryos and offspring, as well as media attention to gendered, racialized, and class-based access to and pricing of assisted reproductive technology, have also driven the development of IVF in the USA.

Citing Articles

Ethics of artificial intelligence in embryo assessment: mapping the terrain.

Koplin J, Johnston M, Webb A, Whittaker A, Mills C Hum Reprod. 2024; 40(2):179-185.

PMID: 39657965 PMC: 11788194. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deae264.


Comparative study of machine learning approaches integrated with genetic algorithm for IVF success prediction.

Dehghan S, Rabiei R, Choobineh H, Maghooli K, Nazari M, Vahidi-Asl M PLoS One. 2024; 19(10):e0310829.

PMID: 39392832 PMC: 11469510. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0310829.


Main topics in assisted reproductive market: A scoping review.

Aderaldo J, Rodrigues de Albuquerque B, Camara de Oliveira M, de Medeiros Garcia Torres M, Lanza D PLoS One. 2023; 18(8):e0284099.

PMID: 37527215 PMC: 10393141. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0284099.


Inequities in Medically Assisted Reproduction: a Scoping Review.

Huddleston A, Ray K, Bacani R, Staggs J, Anderson R, Vassar M Reprod Sci. 2023; 30(8):2373-2396.

PMID: 37099229 PMC: 10132432. DOI: 10.1007/s43032-023-01236-6.


A comparison of assisted human reproduction (AHR) regulation in Ireland with other developed countries.

McDermott O, Ronan L, Butler M Reprod Health. 2022; 19(1):62.

PMID: 35248065 PMC: 8898507. DOI: 10.1186/s12978-022-01359-0.


References
1.
PINCUS G, Enzmann E . THE COMPARATIVE BEHAVIOR OF MAMMALIAN EGGS IN VIVO AND IN VITRO : I. THE ACTIVATION OF OVARIAN EGGS. J Exp Med. 2009; 62(5):665-75. PMC: 2133299. DOI: 10.1084/jem.62.5.665. View

2.
. Mature oocyte cryopreservation: a guideline. Fertil Steril. 2012; 99(1):37-43. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.09.028. View

3.
Rock J, Menkin M . IN VITRO FERTILIZATION AND CLEAVAGE OF HUMAN OVARIAN EGGS. Science. 1944; 100(2588):105-7. DOI: 10.1126/science.100.2588.105. View

4.
King L, Meyer M . The politics of reproductive benefits: U.S. insurance coverage of contraceptive and infertility treatments. Gend Soc. 1997; 11(1):8-30. DOI: 10.1177/089124397011001002. View

5.
Chang M . Fertilization of rabbit ova in vitro. Nature. 1959; 184(Suppl 7):466-7. DOI: 10.1038/184466a0. View