Sex selection for non-medical indications: a survey of current pre-implantation genetic screening practices among U.S. ART clinics
- 237 Downloads
This study aimed to determine the current percentage of United States (U.S.) assisted reproductive technology (ART) clinics offering sex selection via pre-implantation genetic screening (PGS) for non-medical purposes.
The authors conducted website review and telephone interview survey of 493 U.S. ART clinics performing in vitro fertilization (IVF) in 2017. Main outcome measures were pre-implantation genetic screening (PGS)/pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) practices and non-medical sex selection practices including family balancing.
Of the 493 ART clinics in the USA, 482 clinics (97.8%) responded to our telephone interview survey. Among all U.S. ART clinics, 91.9% (n = 449) reported offering PGS and/or PGD. Furthermore, 476 clinics responded to survey questions about sex selection practices. Of those ART clinics, 72.7% (n = 346) reported offering sex selection. More specifically among those clinics offering sex selection, 93.6% (n = 324) reported performing sex selection for family balancing, and 81.2% (n = 281) reported performing for elective purposes (patient preference, regardless of rationale for the request). For couples without infertility, 83.5% (n = 289) of clinics offer sex selection for family balancing and 74.6% (n = 258) for non-specific elective reasons.
The majority of U.S. ART clinics offer non-medical sex selection, a percentage that has increased substantially since last reported in 2006.
KeywordsNon-medical sex selection Gender selection Family balancing Pre-implantation genetic screening (PGS) Pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD)
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 6.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, American Society for Reproductive Medicine, Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. 2015 fertility clinic success rates report: data clinic tables and data dictionary. Atlanta: US Dept of Health and Human Services; 2017.Google Scholar
- 7.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, American Society for Reproductive Medicine, Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. 2014 assisted reproductive technology fertility clinic success rates report. Atlanta: US Dept of Health and Human Services; 2016. Report No.: GS-23F-8144H.Google Scholar
- 8.Fertility Authority. Fertility Clinics by State. New York: Progyny Inc.; 2017. Available at: https://www.fertilityauthority.com/clinics/bystate. Accessed 15 June 2017.
- 9.Infertility Resources. Lafayette: Internet Health Resources Company; 1996–2017. Available at: http://www.ihr.com/infertility/provider/fertility-ivf-clinics.html. Accessed 17 June 2017.
- 10.Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. Preliminary Clinic Summary Report. 2015. Available at: https://www.sartcorsonline.com/rptCSR_PublicMultYear.aspx?reportingYear=2015. Accessed 25 June 2017.
- 11.U.S. Census Bureau. Geographic areas reference manual. 1994. Available at: https://www.census.gov/geo/reference/garm.html. Accessed 15 June 2017.
- 12.U.S. Census Bureau. 2010 Census Urban and Rural Classification and Urban Area Criteria. Available at: https://www.census.gov/geo/reference/ua/urban-rural-2010.html. Accessed 15 June 2017.
- 13.U.S. Census Bureau. Census 2000 Urban and Rural Classification. Available at: https://www.census.gov/geo/reference/ua/urban-rural-2000.html. Accessed 15 June 2017.
- 14.Census Viewer. Census 2010 and 2000 Interactive Maps, Demographics, Statistics, Quick Facts. Eugene: Moonshadow Mobile Inc.; 2016. Available at: http://censusviewer.com/free-maps-and-data-links/. Accessed 2 Aug 2017.
- 15.Census.gov. Geography atlas: regions. Washington: United States Census Bureau. Available at: https://www.census.gov/geo/reference/webatlas/regions.html. Accessed 25 June 2017.