Tick Tock Goes the Clock: Rethinking Policy and Embryo Storage Limits

Abstract

Cryopreservation of human embryos remains, in many jurisdictions, a critical component of the use of the technology of in vitro fertilisation (IVF) in assisted reproduction. However, although the reasons for the freezing of reproductive material-such as cost effectiveness and reducing risks of IVF-are a constant across jurisdictions, the desirable length of storage remains subject to ongoing regulatory debate. Internationally embryo storage limits are variable. This article features data from a recent Australian research project which explores individual attitudes, desires and understandings of law of IVF patients (and their partners) who had or who have embryos in storage. This article uses interviews from the study to argue that storage limits, like any apparently neutral regulatory tool, apply unequally causing unintended physical, mental and emotional harm-particularly to women. This analysis of storage limits exposes the interaction of time, science and law to create, apply and enforce norms and practices of 'natural' embryo storage, suggesting that the imposition of inflexible legislative restrictions upon embryo storage are socially contingent and value laden rather than 'natural' or 'scientific'. This outcome has relevance to wider debates over assisted reproduction policies, suggesting that legal frameworks should adopt more flexibility in application to the patients who use this technology.

Frozen in perpetuity: ‘abandoned embryos’ in Canada

“…The application of a time limit, not only to so-called abandoned embryos but to all embryos created in a particular jurisdiction, has been subject to criticism. For example, in her research on embryo storage limits in Australia, Anita Stuhmcke (2014, p. 289) draws attention to the ways that 10-year time limits for embryo storage have worked to link the ‘life’ of the embryo in storage to the reproductive age of embryo providers. In doing so, she argues that such time limits propagate gendered assumptions about a ‘universally applicable timeframe for reproduction,’ and calls for an understanding of embryo storage and disposition that incorporates flexibility and accounts for the diversity of patients’ experience.…”

“…To be sure, exceptions and flexibility in embryo storage time limits are important in ensuring that patients are able to make reproductive choices consistent with their views, values and priorities ( Karpin et al, 2013 , Stuhmcke, 2014 , Stuhmcke and Chandler, 2014 ). At the same time, legally mandated storage time limits are a useful mechanism to manage the problem of so-called abandoned embryos when patients and couples are no longer involved in reproductive decision making.…”