Advertisement

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics

, Volume 35, Issue 6, pp 1131–1132 | Cite as

Protecting fertility clinics against sperm-related fraud: a call to action

  • Kristy Cho
  • Jacob Ruiter
  • Michael H. Dahan
Letter to Editor
  • 70 Downloads

In the treatment of infertility, patients commonly undergo artificial intrauterine insemination (IUI) or in vitro fertilization (IVF). As these procedures involve the manipulation of gametes outside of the body, cases of unintended parentage have been reported. These cases have been published in non-medical and medical journals [1, 2], and the fear of gametes mix-up is a serious concern. These cases can be complicated by emotional harm, legal actions, and custody battles [1]. Although most often reported as the consequences of medical error, there may be other scenarios leading to genetic parentage of different individuals than those seeking care. In hopes of promoting procedural improvements, this article aims to point out possible scenarios which have not been previously reported, but through which fertility clinics are open to malpractice litigation.

One scenario involves fraud perpetuated by three individuals, a couple seeking care and a sperm donor unbeknownst to the clinic....

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Kirkey S. Switched embryos and wrong sperm: IVF mix-ups lead to babies born with “unintended parentage”. National Post 2016. http://nationalpost.com/health/ivf-mix-ups-lead-to-babies-born-with-unintended-parentage. Accessed 20 Mar 2018.
  2. 2.
    Woolley HE. IVF mishaps. B C Med J. 2001;43:10–1.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bellis MA, Hughes K, Hughes S, Ashton JR. Measuring paternal discrepancy and its public health consequences. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2005;59:749–54.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Greeff JM, Erasmus JC. Three hundred years of low non-paternity in a human population. Heredity. 2015;115:396–404.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chataway J, Sawcer S, Feakes R, Coraddu F, Broadley S, Jones HB, et al. A screen of candidates from peaks of linkage: evidence for the involvement of myeloperoxidase in multiple sclerosis. J Neuroimmunol. 1999;98:208–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Anderson K. How well does paternity confidence match actual paternity? Evid Worldwide Nonpaternity Rates Curr Anthropol. 2006;47:513–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rienzi L, Bariani F, Dalla Zorza M, Albani E, Benini F, Chamayou S, et al. Comprehensive protocol of traceability during IVF: the result of a multicentre failure mode and effect analysis. Hum Reprod. 2017;32:1612–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    De Los Santos MJ, Apter S, Coticchio G, Debrock S, Lundin K, Plancha CE, et al. Revised guidelines for good practice in IVF laboratories (2015). Hum Reprod. 2016;31:685–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  2. 2.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyMUHC Reproductive CentreMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations