PGS – New Study addresses impact of preimplantation genetic screening on donor oocyte-recipient cycles in the United States

Preimplantation genetic screening, or PGS, as practiced in donor oocyte-recipient cycles over the past 9 years, has not been associated with improved odds of live birth or reduction in miscarriage rates.

PGS Study ObjectivePGS, PGD

Our objective was to estimate the contribution of preimplantation genetic screening to in vitro fertilization pregnancy outcomes in donor oocyte-recipient cycles.

PGS Study Design

This was a retrospective cross-sectional study of US national data from the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System between 2005 and 2013. Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting relies on voluntarily annual reports by more than 90% of US in vitro fertilization centers. We evaluated pregnancy and live birth rates in donor oocyte-recipient cycles after the first embryo transfer with day 5/6 embryos. Statistical models, adjusted for patient and donor ages, number of embryos transferred, race, infertility diagnosis, and cycle year were created to compare live birth rates in 392 preimplantation genetic screening and 20,616 control cycles.

PGS Results

Overall, pregnancy and live birth rates were significantly lower in preimplantation genetic screening cycles than in control cycles. Adjusted odds of live birth for preimplantation genetic screening cycles were reduced by 35% (odds ratio, 0.65, 95% confidence interval, 0.53–0.80; P < .001).

PGS Conclusion

Preimplantation genetic screening, as practiced in donor oocyte-recipient cycles over the past 9 years, has not been associated with improved odds of live birth or reduction in miscarriage rates.

November 2017, American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 

Click here to read the entire text of the study.

NY Family Court – “children’s best interests are served through second parent adoptions”

“So long as uncertainty persists in this country and abroad about the status of children conceived by same-sex couples using assisted reproduction, children’s best interests are served through second parent adoptions confirming what already should be crystal clear everywhere: the legal parental status of the second non-biological parent.”

(New York, October 12, 2016) — A New York family court issued a decision last week affirming that married lesbian couples continue to be entitled to second parent adoptions to give added security to their children, who already are entitled to have both spouses recognized as their parents. The court’s decision came after Lambda Legal and its co-counsel submitted a legal memo last month on behalf of four couples, all from Brooklyn, who had sought adoptions to safeguard their children. The Court’s decision also confirms that children born to married same-sex spouses in the state have two legal parents, with or without adoptions and regardless of genetics.gay fathers

“The Court ruling is very clear that children born to married same-sex couples already have two legal parents,” said Susan Sommer, National Director of Constitutional Litigation at Lambda Legal. “But so long as uncertainty persists in this country and abroad about the status of children conceived by same-sex couples using assisted reproduction, children’s best interests are served through second parent adoptions confirming what already should be crystal clear everywhere: the legal parental status of the second non-biological parent. Children have a right to both of their parents, and taking a ‘belt and suspenders’ approach is the best way to secure that right. As this decision confirms, the courts have the authority and responsibility to issue second parent adoptions for children in these families.”

Lambda Legal filed the memo on behalf of four married lesbian couples who had petitioned the family court for second parent adoptions of children they conceived using assisted reproductive technology. Each of these couples planned for and intend to raise their children together, even though only one of the two parents is genetically related to her child. As the legal parents of the children, they are entitled to all the rights and responsibilities that come with being a parent in New York and anywhere they may travel with their children. But because the laws that define parenthood vary from state to state, these couples sought the added security of adoption decrees to confirm the parent-child bond for the non-biological parent.

The Supreme Court’s ruling in Obergefell affirmed that same-sex couples and their children across the country are entitled to all the protections that come through marriage, but some states, like North Carolina<http://www.lambdalegal.org/in-court/cases/nc_weiss-v-braer> and South Carolina, where Lambda Legal is litigating, have resisted giving full recognition to those rights. And disparities persist around the nation in laws about assisted reproduction, making parents wise to seek the extra security of second parent adoptions.

The Court’s decision confirmed that married same-sex spouses using assisted reproduction are both the legal parents of their children, with or without adoptions, and that genetics and adoption aren’t the determinants of parentage. The Court also acknowledged the lingering uncertainties and resistance to parenting rights for same-sex couples in the U.S. and abroad, and thus the importance of access to second parent adoptions for these families. Finally, the decision confirmed the courts’ ongoing authority to grant adoptions to spouses who already are the legal parents of their children under New York’s marital presumption of parentage.

Lambda Legal was joined on the memorandum of law by the following co-counsel, who represented the families in their adoption proceedings:  Teresa D. Calabrese; Rebecca L. Mendel of Rosin Steinhagen Mendel; Melissa B. Brisman and Nancy M. Hartzband of Melissa B. Brisman, Esq., LLC; and Andy Izenson of Diana Adams Law & Mediation, PLLC.

Read the memo. http://www.lambdalegal.org/in-court/legal-docs/ny_20161012_memorandum-law-judicial-authority

Read the decision. http://www.lambdalegal.org/in-court/legal-docs/ny_20161012_matter-of-l

Anonymous Sperm Donors threatened by growth of genetic testing

The rise of personal genetic testing and growth of international DNA databases could put an end to anonymous sperm donors and anonymous egg donation as donor-conceived individuals may unintentionally discover biological relatives, according to UCL researchers.

 

The paper, published today in the journal Human Reproduction, reinforces the need for parents using  anonymous sperm donors and anonymous egg donors to be fully informed that their children’s DNA will identify that they are not the and that they should be encouraged to disclose their use of . Anonymous sperm donors should also be informed that their anonymity is not guaranteed, irrespective of whether they are donating in a country that practises anonymous donation or not.

Over 3 million people have already used direct-to-consumer genetic testing, often via online companies without the input of healthcare professionals, to find out information about their ancestry and health and many are participating in international genetic genealogy databases that will match them with relatives.Surrogacy Abroad

Professor Joyce Harper (UCL Institute of Women’s Health) explained: “DNA tests are increasingly being used to solve unknown parentage cases for adoptees and donor-conceived persons. People are finding half-siblings and even biological parents in online databases that are open to the public. A sperm donor does not have to be in the database to be identified as identification can be made from matches with other close relatives such as second or third cousins.”

Using these genetic databases, donor-conceived adults who have not been informed of their status may find out that they are donor-conceived, which may lead to traumatic breakdown of trust with parents.”

Recently, there has been a concerted effort within the scientific community and more widely to foster greater openness about genomic data. These developments indicate that many more healthcare clients are going to know information about their genomes in the future. The situation is further complicated by the fact that different countries, even with the EU, have different laws surrounding gamete donation, donor anonymity and parental disclosure.

by Rowan Walker, MedicalExpress.com, April 14, 2106

Click here to read the entire article.