Liability for embryo mix-ups in fertility practices in the USA
- PMID: 33598752
- PMCID: PMC8190234
- DOI: 10.1007/s10815-021-02108-1
Liability for embryo mix-ups in fertility practices in the USA
Abstract
Purpose: To study recent legal cases involving the transfer of the incorrect embryo into patients and learn how fertility clinics can better serve clients, protect themselves financially, and safeguard their physicians' personal assets.
Methods: The Nexis Uni database was used to review legal cases, news, and business publications of previous cases of embryo mix-ups. County and district courthouse dockets were also queried for filings and court documents related to lawsuits involving embryo mix-ups using Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER). Emphasis was placed on court decisions, awarded damages, and legal and media coverage related to embryo mix-up events.
Results: A case law review of US legal databases and courthouse dockets was conducted for cases between 2000 and 2020, focusing on lawsuits against reproductive endocrinologists and in vitro fertilization (IVF) facilities offering embryo transfer (ET). Improper labeling and ineffective communication led to errors in the cases reviewed.
Conclusion: It is prudent for clinics to protect themselves from embryo mix-ups, which can subsequently lead to undesirable clinical outcomes, as well as lawsuits stemming from these errors. This article emphasizes following labeling guidelines when storing embryos, employing a two-step read back method prior to ET, and offering genetic testing when a discrepancy is found in the record. In the case an embryo mix-up does occur, it is recommended to protect personal assets through business organizing procedures and consider settlement offers for policy limits.
Keywords: Embryo transfer; IVF error; Liability; Medical negligence; Mix-up.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare no competing interests.
Similar articles
-
Cryostorage failures: a medicolegal review.J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019 Jun;36(6):1041-1048. doi: 10.1007/s10815-019-01478-x. Epub 2019 May 24. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019. PMID: 31127476 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Malpractice litigation surrounding in vitro fertilization in the United States: a legal literature review.Fertil Steril. 2023 Apr;119(4):572-580. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2022.12.038. Epub 2022 Dec 27. Fertil Steril. 2023. PMID: 36581015 Review.
-
Barcode tagging of human oocytes and embryos to prevent mix-ups in assisted reproduction technologies.Hum Reprod. 2014 Jan;29(1):18-28. doi: 10.1093/humrep/det409. Epub 2013 Nov 13. Hum Reprod. 2014. PMID: 24227078
-
Preimplantation genetic diagnosis: a systematic review of litigation in the face of new technology.Fertil Steril. 2012 Nov;98(5):1277-82. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.07.1100. Epub 2012 Aug 14. Fertil Steril. 2012. PMID: 22901852
-
Embryo transfer practices in the United States: a survey of clinics registered with the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology.Fertil Steril. 2010 Sep;94(4):1432-1436. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.07.987. Epub 2009 Sep 11. Fertil Steril. 2010. PMID: 19748089
Cited by
-
Using artificial intelligence to avoid human error in identifying embryos: a retrospective cohort study.J Assist Reprod Genet. 2022 Oct;39(10):2343-2348. doi: 10.1007/s10815-022-02585-y. Epub 2022 Aug 13. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2022. PMID: 35962845 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Carpentieri AM, Lumalcuri JJ, Shaw J, Joseph GF. Overview of the 2015 American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ Survey on Professional Liability. ACOG Clin Rev. 2015;20:1–6.
-
- Nguyen A. Glendale couple sues fertility clinic after woman gives birth to their son in embryo snafu. Los Angeles Times. 2019 [cited 2020 Apr 2]; Available from: https://www.latimes.com/socal/glendale-news-press/news/tn-gnp-me-fertili....
-
- Cal Penal Code § 367g. 2004.
-
- Manukyan v CHA Health Systems, 19STCV23892, 2019 LA Super. Ct.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical