Abstract
As assisted reproductive technologies (ART) become increasingly popular, debate has intensified over the ethical justification for restricting access to ART based on various medical and non-medical factors. In 2010, the Australian state of Victoria enacted world-first legislation that denies access to ART for all patients with certain criminal or child protection histories. Patients and their partners are identified via a compulsory police and child protection check prior to commencing ART and, if found to have a previous relevant conviction or child protection order, are given a “presumption against treatment.” This article reviews the legislation and identifies arguments that may be used to justify restricting access to ART for various reasons. The arguments reviewed include limitations of reproductive rights, inheriting undesirable genetic traits, distributive justice, and the welfare of the future child. We show that none of these arguments justifies restricting access to ART in the context of past criminal history. We show that a “presumption against treatment” is an unjustified infringement on reproductive freedom and that it creates various inconsistencies in current social, medical, and legal policy. We argue that a state-enforced policy of restricting access to ART based on the non-medical factor of past criminal history is an example of unjust discrimination and cannot be ethically justified, with one important exception: in cases where ART treatment may be considered futile on the basis that the parents are not expected to raise the resulting child.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Australian Medical Association. 2012. Health and the criminal justice system—2012. https://ama.com.au/position-statement/health-and-criminal-justice-system-2012. Accessed March 1, 2014.
Assisted Reproductive Treatment Act 2008. Victorian Legislation No. 76 of 2008. http://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/Domino/Web_Notes/LDMS/PubStatbook.nsf/f932b66241ecf1b7ca256e92000e23be/3ADFC9FBA2C0F526CA25751C0020E494/$FILE/08-076a.pdf. Accessed March 1, 2014.
Assisted Reproductive Technologies Review Committee. 2006. Report of the Independent Review of Assisted Reproductive Technologies. https://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/79D96DD80F01073ECA257BF0001C1ABB/$File/artrc_appendices.pdf. Accessed March 2014.
Australian Associated Press. 2009. Parents angered by IVF police checks. The Age, September 3. http://news.theage.com.au/breaking-news-national/parents-angered-by-ivf-police-checks-20090903-f8m6.html. Accessed March 1, 2014.
Australian Government. 2007. Ethical guidelines on the use of assisted reproductive technology in clinical practice and research. http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/guidelines/publications/e78. Accessed March 1, 2014.
Becker, G., and R.D. Nachtigall. 1992. Eager for medicalisation: The social production of infertility as a disease. Sociology of Health and Illness 14(4): 456–471.
Boivin, J., and G. Pennings. 2005. Parenthood should be regarded as a right. Archives of Disease in Childhood 90(8): 784−785.
Bourke, E. 2009. IVF patients enraged over police checks. PM, September 3. http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2009/s2675919.htm. Accessed March 1, 2014.
Brennan, P.A., S.A. Mednick, and Jacobsen, B. 1996. Assessing the role of genetics in crime using adoption cohorts. Ciba Foundation Symposium 194: 115−123.
Chambers, G.M., E.A. Sullivan, O. Ishihara, M.G. Chapman, and G.D. Adamson. 2009. The economic impact of assisted reproductive technology: A review of selected developed countries. Fertility and Sterility 91(6): 2281−2294.
Chen, T.H., S.P. Chang, C.F. Tsaie, and K.D. Juang. 2004. Prevalence of depressive and anxiety disorders in an assisted reproductive technique clinic. Human Reproduction 19(10): 2313−2318.
Cohen, P. 2011. Genetic basis for crime: A new look. The New York Times, June 20. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/20/arts/genetics-and-crime-at-institute-of-justice-conference.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0. Accessed March 1, 2014.
Cousineau, T. 2007. Psychological impact of infertility. Best practice and Research Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology 21(2): 293−308.
Dondorp, W., G. De Wert, G. Pennings, et al. 2010. Lifestyle-related factors and access to medically assisted reproduction. Human Reproduction 25(3): 578−583.
DeSante, J. 2009. Can we screen IVF patients? Women’s Bioethics Project, June/July. http://www.womensbioethics.org/index.php?p=Bioethics_Student_Scholar_Forum&s=349. Accessed March 1, 2014.
Emerton, J. 2010. Castles v Secretary to the Department of Justice & Ors [2010] VSC 310 (9 July 2010). Supreme Court of Victoria, July 23. http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VSC/2010/310.html. Accessed March 1, 2014.
Fertility Associates. 2013. Public funding and eligibility. http://www.fertilityassociates.co.nz/paying-for-treatment/public-funding-and-eligibility.aspx. Accessed March 1, 2014.
Fertility Society of Australia. 2010. Code of practice for assisted reproductive technology units. http://www.fertilitysociety.com.au/rtac/. Accessed March 1, 2014.
Goold, I. 2005. Should older and postmenopausal women have access to assisted reproductive technology? Monash Bioethics Review 24(1): 27−46.
Gracia, D. 2012. The many faces of autonomy. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 33(1): 57−64.
Health Canada. 2013. Assisted Human Reproduction: An Act respecting assisted human reproduction and related research. http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/brgtherap/legislation/reprod/index-eng.php. Accessed March 1, 2014.
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. 2005. Welfare of the child and the assessment of those seeking treatment. http://www.hfea.gov.uk/docs/TomorrowsChildren_revised_guidance.pdf. Accessed March 1, 2014.
James, M. 2000. Child abuse and neglect: Part 1—redefining the issues. Australian Institute of Criminology Trends and Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, no. 146: 1–6. http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/E/B/0/%7BEB0FEBC9-4838-415E-8967-51E80C3E32DD%7Dti146.pdf. Accessed March 1, 2014.
Leeton, J. 2004. The early history of IVF in Australia and its contribution to the world (1970−1990). Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 44(6): 495−501.
Lockwood, G. 1999. Pregnancy, autonomy and paternalism. Journal of Medical Ethics 25(6): 537−540.
Maclean, M. 2005. Parenthood should not be regarded as a right. Archives of Disease in Childhood 90(8): 782−783.
McArthur, G., and S. Deery. 2011. VCAT paves the way for sex offenders to access IVF. The Herald Sun, July 30. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/sex-criminal-wins-right-to-ivf/story-e6frf7jo-1226104613811. Accessed March 1, 2014.
McDougall, R. 2005. Acting parentally: An argument against sex selection. Journal of Medical Ethics 31(10): 601–605. doi:10.1136/jme.2004.008813.
Melbourne IVF. 2013. Victorian legislation on IVF. http://mivf.com.au/fertility-treatment/victorian-legislation-on-ivf. Accessed March 1, 2014.
Neuberger, J., D. Adams, P, MacMaster, and A. Maidment. 1998. Assessing priorities for allocation of donor liver grafts: Survey of public and clinicians. British Medical Journal 317(7152): 172−175.
New Zealand Legislation. 2012. Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Act 2004. http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2004/0092/latest/DLM319241.html?search=ts_act_Assisted+reproductive_resel&sr=1. Accessed March 1, 2014.
Overall, C. 2012. Think before you breed. The New York Times, June 17. http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/17/think-before-you-breed/. Accessed March 1, 2014.
Parliament of Victoria. 2008. Parliamentary debates (Hansard): Legislative Assembly, fifty-sixth Parliament, first session, Thursday 4 December. http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/downloadhansard/pdf/Assembly/Jul-Dec%202008/Assembly%20Extract%204%20December%202008%20from%20Book%2017.pdf. Accessed March 1, 2014.
Pennings, G. 1999. Measuring the welfare of the child: In search of the appropriate evaluation principle. Human Reproduction 14(5): 1146−1150.
Pennings, G., G. De Wert, F. Shenfield, J. Cohen, B. Tarlatzis, and P. Devroey. 2007. ESHRE Task Force on Ethics and Law 13: The welfare of the child in medically assisted reproduction. Human Reproduction 22(10): 2585–2588.
Peterson, M. 2005. Assisted reproductive technologies and equity of access issues. Journal of Medical Ethics 31(5): 280–285.
Robertson, J.A. 1996. Children of choice: Freedom and the new reproductive technologies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Savulescu, J. 2002. Is there a “right not to be born”? Reproductive decision-making, options and the right to information. Journal of Medical Ethics 28(2): 65−67.
Savulescu, J., M. Hemsley, A. Newson, and B. Foddy. 2006. Behavioural genetics: Why eugenic selection is preferable to enhancement. Journal of Applied Philosophy 23(2): 157−171.
Schneiderman, L., N. Jecker, and A. Jonsen. 1990. Medical futility: Its meaning and ethical implications. Annals of Internal Medicine 112(12): 949−954.
Solberg, B. 2009. Getting beyond the welfare of the child in assisted reproduction. Journal of Medical Ethics 35(6): 373−376.
Steinbock, B., and R. McClamrock. 1994. When is birth unfair to the child? The Hastings Center Report 24(6): 15–21.
The Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine [ASRM]. 2004. Human immunodeficiency virus and infertility treatment. Fertility and Sterility. 94(1): 11−15.
United Nations. 1998. Body of principles for the protection of all persons under any form of detention or imprisonment. http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/43/a43r173.htm. Accessed March 1, 2014.
Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal [VCAT]. 2011. ABY, ABZ v Patient Review Panel [(Health & Privacy) [2011] VCAT 1382 (29 July 2011).and VCAT, August 5. http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/vic/VCAT/2011/1382.html?stem=0&synonyms=0&query=IVF. Accessed March 1, 2014.
Weston, G., and B. Vollenhoven. 2002. Is IVF becoming a band-aid for social infertility? Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 42(5): 476−477.
Wilkinson, D., P. Thiele, A. Watkins, and L. De Crespigny. 2012. Fatally flawed? A review and ethical analysis of lethal congenital malformations. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 119(11): 1302−1308.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Lynn Gillam for her input into discussions leading up to this paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Thompson, K., McDougall, R. Restricting Access to ART on the Basis of Criminal Record. Bioethical Inquiry 12, 511–520 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-015-9622-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-015-9622-z