Menu: Home :: go to Journal :: switch to Russian :: switch to English
You are here: all Journals and Issues→ Journal→ Issue→ Article

Bioethical issues of reproductive technologies

Annotation

The demographic situation in the modern world is problematic: the birth rate is declining, the rates of primary and secondary infertility are progressively increasing. Assisted reproductive technologies are methods to solve the problem of infertility. From the point of view of bioethics, there are a number of controversial issues: determining the personal status of the embryo, the ratio of risks and benefits for participants in the procedures, the possibility of cryopreservation, the destruction of “extra embryos”, etc. The purpose of our research was to study the attitude of the population to assessing the importance of bioethical aspects of the use of assisted reproductive technologies. During the study, an anonymous survey was conducted on the Google platform. The study involved 104 respondents of both sexes (83 women, 21 men) of various ages, mostly (59.6 %) in the category of 15–20 years. The survey questions were aimed at determining the degree of awareness of the participants about the problem of infertility and assisted reproductive technologies, the bioethical issues that they affect, as well as the subjective attitude to the use of these methods. Most of the respondents had an idea about the goals of assisted reproductive technologies and the bioethical problems that they generate. The survey participants noted the importance of communication between a doctor and a patient as one of the factors that makes it possible to increase the effectiveness of assisted reproductive technologies protocols: sympathy and moral support should be considered the basic norms of communication between a doctor and a patient with an infertility issue.

Keywords

reproductive technologies; in vitro fertilization; embryo status; principles of Bioethics; deontology

Full-text in one file

Download

DOI

10.20310/2782-5019-2023-5-2-67-72

UDC

614.2

Pages

67-72

References

1. Zegers-Hochschild F., Adamson G.D., de Mouzon J., Ishihara O., Mansour R., Nygren K., Sullivan E., Vanderpoel S.; International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology; World Health Organization. International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology (ICMART) and the World Health Organization (WHO) revised glossary of ART terminology, 2009. Fertil. Steril. 2009 Nov;92(5):1520-1524. DOI 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.09.009 2. Mascarenhas M.N., Flaxman S.R., Boerma T., Vanderpoel S., Stevens G.A. National, regional, and global trends in infertility prevalence since 1990: a systematic analysis of 277 health surveys. PLoS Med. 2012;9(12):e1001356. DOI 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001356 3. Sun H., Gong T.T., Jiang Y.T., Zhang S., Zhao Y.H., Wu Q.J. Global, regional, and national prevalence and disability-adjusted life-years for infertility in 195 countries and territories, 1990–2017: results from a global burden of disease study, 2017. Aging (Albany NY). 2019 Dec 2;11(23):10952-10991. DOI 10.18632/aging.102497 4. Starc A., Trampuš M., Pavan Jukić D., Rotim C., Jukić T., Polona Mivšek A. Infertility and sexual dysfunctions: a systematic literature review. Acta Clin. Croat. 2019 Sep;58(3):508-515. DOI 10.20471/acc.2019.58.03.15 5. Barratt C.L.R., Björndahl L., De Jonge C.J., Lamb D.J., Osorio Martini F., McLachlan R., Oates R.D., van der Poel S., St John B., Sigman M., Sokol R., Tournaye H. The diagnosis of male infertility: an analysis of the evidence to support the development of global WHO guidance-challenges and future research opportunities. Hum. Reprod. Update. 2017 Nov 1;23(6):660-680. DOI 10.1093/humupd/dmx021 6. Bellver J., Donnez J. Introduction: Infertility etiology and offspring health. Fertil. Steril. 2019 Jun;111(6):1033-1035. DOI 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.04.043 7. Merviel P., James P., Bouée S., Le Guillou M., Rince C., Nachtergaele C., Kerlan V. Impact of myo-inositol treatment in women with polycystic ovary syndrome in assisted reproductive technologies. Reprod. Health. 2021 Jan 19;18(1):13. DOI 10.1186/s12978-021-01073-3 8. Sánchez-Pavón E., Mendoza H., García-Ferreyra J. Trisomy 21 and Assisted Reproductive Technologies: A review. JBRA Assist. Reprod. 2022 Jan 17;26(1):129-141. DOI 10.5935/1518-0557.20210047 9. Bosch E., De Vos M., Humaidan P. The Future of Cryopreservation in Assisted Reproductive Technologies. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2020 Feb 20;11:67. DOI https://doi.org/ 10.3389/fendo.2020.00067 10. Miklavcic J.J., Flaman P. Personhood status of the human zygote, embryo, fetus. Linacre Q. 2017 May;84(2):130-144. DOI 10.1080/00243639.2017.1299896 Erratum in: Linacre Q. 2022 Feb;89(1):7.

Received

2023-03-29

Section of issue

Preventive medicine

Для корректной работы сайта используйте один из современных браузеров. Например, Firefox 55, Chrome 60 или более новые.