Assisted Human Reproduction

Regulating Creation is a collection of essays featuring contributions by Canadian and international scholars. It offers a variety of perspectives on the role of law in dealing with the legal, ethical, and policy issues surrounding changing reproductive technologies.

Offers a comprehensive guide to assisted reproductive technology surveillance, describing its history, global variations, and best practices.

The world has undergone a revolution in assisted reproduction, as processes such as in vitro fertilization, embryonic screening, and surrogacy have become commonplace. Yet when governments attempt to regulate this field, they have not always been successful. Canada is a case in point: six years after the federal government created comprehensive legislation, the Supreme Court of Canada struck it down for violating provincial authority over health. In Assisted Reproduction Policy in Canada, Dave Snow provides the first historical exploration of Canadian assisted reproduction policy, from the 1989 creation of the Royal Commission on New Reproductive Technologies to the present day. Snow argues the federal government’s policy failure can be traced to its contradictory "policy framing," which sent mixed messages about the purposes of the legislation. In light of the federal government’s diminished role, Snow examines how other institutions have made policy in this emerging field. Snow finds provincial governments, medical organizations, and even courts have engaged in considerable policymaking, particularly with respect to surrogacy, parentage, and clinical intervention. The result—a complex field of overlapping and often conflicting policies—paints a fascinating portrait of different political actors and institutions working together. Accessibly written yet comprehensive in scope, Assisted Reproduction Policy in Canada highlights how paying attention to multiple policymakers can improve our knowledge of health care regulation.

Human reproductive cloning is an assisted reproductive technology that would be carried out with the goal of creating a newborn genetically identical to another human being. It is currently the subject of much debate around the world, involving a variety of ethical, religious, societal, scientific, and medical issues. Scientific and Medical Aspects of Human Reproductive Cloning considers the scientific and medical sides of this issue, plus ethical issues that pertain to human-subjects research. Based on experience with reproductive cloning in animals, the report concludes that human reproductive cloning would be dangerous for the woman, fetus, and newborn, and is likely to fail. The study panel did not address the issue of whether human reproductive cloning, even if it were found to be medically safe, would beâ€"or would not beâ€"acceptable to individuals or society.

A comprehensive text on the process of human fertilization and reproduction and the technique of in-vitro fertilization and embryo transfer. Includes coverage of assisted fertilization and the potential applicability of genetic diagnosis of the pre-implantation embryo.

With contributions from: Eric Blyth, Ken Daniels, Julia Feast, Robert Lee, Nina Martin, Alexina McWhinnie, Derek Morgan, Clare Murray, Sharon Pettle, Claire Potter, Jim Richards and Francoise Shenfield The separation of procreation from conception has broadened notions of parenthood and created novel dilemmas. A woman may carry a foetus derived from gametes neither or only one of which came from her or her partner; or she may carry a foetus created using in vitro fertilisation (IVF) with the purpose of handing it to two other parents one, neither or both of whom may be genetically related to the prospective child. Parents may consist of single-sex couples, only one of them genetically related to the child; the prospective mother may be past her menopause; and genetic parenthood after death is now achievable. In a world increasingly reliant on medical science, how can the argument that equates traditional with natural and novel with unnatural/unethical be justified? Should there be legislation, which is notoriously slow to change, in a field driven by dazzling new possibilities at ever faster rate; particularly when restrictions differ from country to country, so that those who can afford it travel elsewhere for their treatment of choice? Whose rights are paramount - the adults hoping to build a family or the prospective child(ren)s future well being? On what basis can apparently competing rights be regulated or adjudicated and how and to what extent can these be enforced in practice?