Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Feb;38(2):305-317.
doi: 10.1007/s10815-020-02017-9. Epub 2021 Jan 6.

Regulating reproductive genetic services: dealing with spiral-shaped processes and techno-scientific imaginaries

Affiliations

Regulating reproductive genetic services: dealing with spiral-shaped processes and techno-scientific imaginaries

Ido Alon et al. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2021 Feb.

Abstract

Purpose: We have been inquiring into the diffusion process of reproductive genetic services (RGS) and the viability of geneticization in human reproduction.

Method: A 2-round modified-Delphi survey was applied amongst Israeli and Spanish experts to analyze regulatory attitudes and expectations about the future applications of RGS. We argue that an explanation of RGS diffusion based on a 'technology-push' impulse should be complemented by a 'demandpull' approach, which underscores the importance of regulatory frameworks and demand-inducing policies. The diffusion of RGS is advancing in a 'spiralshaped' process where technology acts as a cause and effect simultaneously, modulating social acceptance and redefining the notions of health and responsibility along the way.

Results: We suggest that there is a 'grey-zone' of RGS regulations regarding four procedures: the use of germline genome modification (GGM) for severe monogenic disorders, preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) for detection of chromosomal abnormalities, PGT for multifactorial diseases, and PGT with whole-exome screening.

Conclusions: Although far from the geneticization of human reproduction, our findings suggest that, since techno-scientific imaginaries tend to shape regulations and thus favor the diffusion of RGS, policymakers should pay attention to those procedures by focusing on good practices and equity while providing sound information on potential risks and expected success rates. A broad and inclusive societal debate is critical for overcoming the difficulty of drawing a clear line between medical and non-medical uses of genetic selection and engineering while searching for the right balance between allowing reproductive autonomy and protecting the public interest.

Keywords: Assisted reproductive technologies; Delphi; Diffusion of innovation; Preimplantation genetic testing; Regulating emerging technologies; Reproductive genetic services.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Agarwal A, Mulgund A, Hamada A, Chyatte MR. A unique view on male infertility around the globe. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2015;13:37. doi: 10.1186/s12958-015-0032-1. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Alon I, Guimon J, Urbanos-Garrido R. What to expect from assisted reproductive technologies? Experts’ forecasts for the next two decades. Technol Forecast Soc Chang. 2019a;148. 10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119722.
    1. Alon I, Guimon J, Urbanos-Garrido R. Regulatory responses to assisted reproductive technology: a comparative analysis of Spain and Israel. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019;36:1665–1168. doi: 10.1007/s10815-019-01525-7. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Altarescu G, Beeri RD, Eldar-Geva T, Steinberg A, Levy-Lahad E, Renbaum P. Preimplantation genetic risk reduction: a new dilemma in the era of chromosomal microarrays and exome sequencing. Reprod BioMed Online. 2015;5:706–710. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2015.07.002. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Asch A, Barlevy D. Disability and genetics: a disability critique of pre-natal testing and pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). eLS. Chichester: Wiley; 2012.

LinkOut - more resources