Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Legal issues raised by in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer in the United States

  • Published:
Journal of in Vitro Fertilization and Embryo Transfer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Reference Bibliography

  1. American Fertility Society: Minimal standards for programs of in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 1984;41:13

    Google Scholar 

  2. Andrews LB: Legal issues raised by in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer.In Human in Vitro Fertilization and Embryo Transfer, DP Wolf, MM Quigley (eds). 1984, p 11

  3. Andrews LB: The stork market: The law of the new reproduction technologies. ABA J 1984;Aug:50

    Google Scholar 

  4. Annas GJ: Righting the wrong of “wrongful life,” Hastings Center Report, Feb 1981, p 8

  5. Cohen M: The “brave new baby” and the law: Fashioning remedies for the victims of in vitro fertilization. Am J Law Med 1978;4:319

    Google Scholar 

  6. Edgar HSH: The legal implications: Are restraints likely? Contemp Ob/Gyn 1982;20:233

    Google Scholar 

  7. Flannery DM, Weisman CD, Lipsett CR, Braverman AN: Testtube babies: Legal issues raised by in vitro fertilization. Geo Law J 1979;67:1295

    Google Scholar 

  8. Fox RC: Ethical and existential developments in contemporaneous American medicine: Their implications for culture and society.In Law and Ethics in Health Care, JB McKinley (ed). Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 1982, p 333

    Google Scholar 

  9. Furrow BR: Impaired children and tort remedies: The emergence of a consensus. Law Med Health Care 1983;Sept:148

    Google Scholar 

  10. Graham ML: Surrogate gestation and the protection of choice. Santa Clara Law Rev 1982;22 p 316

    Google Scholar 

  11. Grobstein C, Flower M, Mendeloff J: External human fertilization: An evaluation of policy. Science 1983;222:127

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hershey N, Miller RD: Human Experimentation and the Law. Germantown, MD, Aspen Systems, 1976

    Google Scholar 

  13. Holder AR: Medical Malpractice Law, 2nd ed. New York, John Wiley & Sons, 1978

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kapp MB: Prescribing approved drugs for nonapproved uses: Physicians' disclosure obligations to their patients. Law Med Health Care 1981;Oct:20

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kass L.R.: Babies by means of in vitro fertilization: Unethical experiments on the unborn? N Engl J Med 1971;285:1174

    Google Scholar 

  16. Katz B: Legal implications and regulation of in vitro fertilization.In Genetics and the Law II, A Milunsky, GJ Annas (eds). New York, Plenum Press, 1979, p 351

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kinney LH: Legal issues of the new reproductive technologies. Cal St B J 1977:Nov/Dec:514

    Google Scholar 

  18. Lappe M: Ethics at the center of life: Protecting vulnerable subjects, Hastings Center Report, Oct 1978, p 11

  19. Law Review Comments: New reproductive technologies: The legal problem and a solution. Tenn Law Rev 1982;49:303

    Google Scholar 

  20. Protecting inheritance rights of children born through in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer: Suggestions for a legislative approach. St Louis U Law J 1983;27:901

  21. Artificial human reproduction: Legal problems presented by the test tube baby. Emory Law J 1979;28:1045

    Google Scholar 

  22. Love's labor lost: Legal and ethical implications in artificial human procreation. U Det J Urb Law 1981:58:459

    Google Scholar 

  23. Law Review Notes: Lawmaking and science: A practical look at in vitro fertilication and embryo transfer. Det C Law Rev 1979:429

  24. In vitro fertilization: Hope for childless couples breeds legal exposure for physicians. U Rich Law Rev 1983;17:311

  25. Lewis MA, Warden CD: Law and Ethics in the Medical Office. Philadelphia, Davis, 1983

    Google Scholar 

  26. Lorio KV: In vitro fertilization and embryo transfer: Fertile areas for litigation. SW Law J 1982;35:973

    Google Scholar 

  27. McCormick RA: Ethical questions: A look at the issues. Contemp Ob/Gyn 1982;20:277

    Google Scholar 

  28. Necheles T: Standards of medical care: How does an innovative medical procedure become accepted? Law Med Health Care 1982;10:15

    Google Scholar 

  29. Oakley M: Test-tube babies: Proposals for legal regulation of new methods of human conception and prenatal development. Fam Law Q 1974;8:385

    Google Scholar 

  30. Palm MT: Legal implications of artificial conception: Making babies makes law. Med Trial Tech Q 1982;28:404

    Google Scholar 

  31. Persky MS: Wrongful life: The dawning of a new cause of action in Illinois? Ill B J 1983;June:594

    Google Scholar 

  32. Powledge TM: A report from the Del Zio trial, Hastings Center Report, Oct 1978, p 15

  33. Pozgar GD: Legal Aspects of Health Care Administration, 2nd ed. Rockville, MD, Aspen, 1983

    Google Scholar 

  34. Quigley MM, Andrews LB: Human in vitro fertilization and the law. Fertil Steril 1984;42:348

    Google Scholar 

  35. Ramsey P: Manufacturing our offspring: Weighing the risks, Hastings Center Report, Oct 1978, p 7

  36. Reilly P: In vitro fertilization—a legal perspective.In Genetics and the Law, A Milunsky, GJ Annas (eds), New York, Plenum Press, 1975, p 359

    Google Scholar 

  37. Robertson JA: In vitro conception and harm to the unborn. Hastings Center Report, Oct 1978, p 13

  38. Robertson JA: Reproductive technologies. VI. Legal aspects.In Encyclopedia of Bioethics, WT Reich (ed). New York, Free-Press-Macmillan, 1978, p 1464

    Google Scholar 

  39. Robertson JA: Procreative liberty and the control of conception, pregnancy, and childbirth. Va Law Rev 1983;69:405

    Google Scholar 

  40. Sweeney WJ III, Goldsmith LS: Will test tube babies spawn legal problems? Legal Aspects Med Pract 1979;Oct:30

    Google Scholar 

  41. Sweeney WJ III, Goldsmith LS: Test tube babies: Medical and legal considerations. J Legal Med 1980;2:1

    Google Scholar 

  42. Toulmin S: In vitro fertilization: Answering the ethical objections, Hastings Center Report, Oct 1978, p 9.

  43. Tuchler DJ: Man-made man and the law. St Louis U Law J 1978;22:310

    Google Scholar 

  44. Wadlington W: Artificial conception: The challenge for family law. Va Law Rev 1983;69:465

    Google Scholar 

  45. Walters L: Human in vitro fertilization: A review of the ethical literature, Hastings Center Report, Aug 1979, p 23

Reference Notes

  1. 38 Fed. Reg. 27882 (1973) (Dept. HEW, Protection of Human Subjects, Proposed Policy).

  2. 38 Fed. Reg. 31738 (1973) (Dept. HEW, NIH, Protection of Human Subjects, Policies and Procedures).

  3. 39 Fed. Reg. 30648 (1974) (Dept. HEW, Protection of Human Subjects, Proposed Policy).

  4. Title II, National Research Service Award Act of 1974, Pub. L. No. 93-348, Secs. 201 to 215, 88 Stat. 342, 348–354 (1974).

  5. 40 Fed. Reg. 33526 (1975) (Rules and Regulations, Dept. HEW, Protection of Human Subjects, Fetuses, Pregnant Women, in Vitro Fertilization).

  6. 44 Fed. Reg. 35033 (1979) (Protection of Human Subjects; HEW Support of Human in Vitro Fertilization and Embryo Transfer; Report of the Ethics Advisory Board).

  7. Quigley MM, Andrews LB: Human in vitro fertilization and the law. Fertil Steril 1984;42:348–350.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Pa. Stat. Ann. Tit. 18, Sec. 3213(e) (Supp. 1983–1984).

  9. Ala. Stat. Sec. 25.20.045 (Supp. 1982); Ark. Statutes Sec. 61–141 (1971); Calif. Civ. Code Sec. 7005 (West Gen. Supp. 1982); Colo. Rev. Stat. Sec. 19-6-106 (1978); Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. Secs. 45–69f to −69m (West 1981); Fla. Stat. Ann. Sec. 742.11 (West Cum. Supp. 1983); Ga. Code Ann. Secs. 74-101.1, 74-9904 (1981); Idaho Code Secs. 39-5401 to −5407 (1983 Supp. Michie); Ill. Ann. Stat. Chap. 40, Secs. 1451 et seq. (Smith-Hurd Supp. 1983–1984); Kan. Stat. Ann. Secs. 23–128 to −130 (1981); La. Civ. Code Ann. Art. 188 (West Supp. 1983); Md. Health-Gen. Ann. Code Art. 20. Sec. 212 (1980), Md. Est. & Trusts Code Ann. Sec. 1–206(b) (1974); Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. Secs. 333.2824, 700.111 (1980); Minn. Stat. Ann. Sec. 157.56 (West 1982); Mont. Code Ann. Sec. 40-6-106 (1981); Nev. Rev. Stat. Sec. 126.061 (1979); N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law Sec. 73 (McKinney 1977); N.C. Gen Stat. Sec. 49A-1 (1976); Okla. Stat. Ann. Tit. 10, Secs. 551 to 553 (West Cum. Supp. 1982–1983); Ore. Rev. Stat. Secs 109.239, .243, .247 and 677.355, .360, .365, .370, .990 (1981); Tenn. Code Ann. Sec. 53–446 (Cum. Supp. 1982); Tex. Fam. Code Ann. Sec. 12.03 (Vernon 1975); Va. Code Ann. Sec. 64.1–7.1 (Repl. Vol. 1980); Wash. Rev. Code Ann. Sec. 26.26.050 (Supp. 1982); Wis. Stat. Ann. Secs. 767.47(9) (West 1981), 891.40 (West Cum. Supp. 1982–1983); Wyo. Stat. Sec. 14-2-103 (1977).

  10. Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. Sec. 36-2302 (Supp. 1982–1983); Ark. Statutes Secs. 82–436 to −442 (1983 Supp.); Calif. Health & Safety Code Sec. 25956 (West 1981); Fla. Stat. Ann. Secs. 390.001(6), (7) (West Supp. 1983); Ill. Ann. Stat. Chap. 38, Secs. 81-26,-32,-32.1 (Smith-Hurd Cum. Supp. 1982–1983); Ind. Code Ann. Sec. 35-1-58.5-6 (Burns Repl. Vol. 1979); Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. Sec. 436.026 (Baldwin 1982); La. Rev. Stat. Ann. Sec. 14:87.2 (West 1974), Sec. 40:1299.35.13 (West Supp. 1981); Maine Rev. Stat. Ann. Tit. 22, Sec. 1593 (1980); Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. Chap. 112, Sec. 12J(a) (West 1981); Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. Secs. 333.2685 to .2692 (1980); Minn. Stat. Ann. Secs. 145.1–22, .421, .422 (West Supp. 1979); Mo. Ann. Stat. Sec. 188.037 (Vernon Supp. 1983); Mont. Code Ann. Sec. 50-20-108 (1983); Neb. Rev. Stat. Secs. 28–342. −346 (1979); N.M. Stat. Ann. Secs. 24-9A-1 et seq. (1979); N.D. Cent. Code Secs. 14-02.2-01,-02 (Repl. Vol. 1981); Ohio Rev. Code Ann. Sec. 2919.14 (Baldwin 1981); Okla. Stat. Ann. Tit. 63, Sec. 1–735 (West Supp. 1981–1982); Pa. Stat. Ann. Tit. 18, Sec. 3213 (Supp. 1983–1984), Tit. 35, Sec. 6605(b) (Purdon 1977); Gen. Laws of R.I. Sec. 11-54-1,2 (Michie 1983 Cum. Supp.); S.D. Codified Laws Ann. Sec. 34-23A-17 (1977); Tenn. Code Ann. Sec. 39–308(b) (Supp. 1981); Utah Code Ann. Sec. 76-7-310 (1978); Wyo. Stat. Sec. 35-6-115 (1977).

  11. Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. Sec. 36-2302 (Suppl. 1982–1983); Calif. Health & Safety Code Sec. 25956 (West 1981); Ill. Ann. Stat. Chap. 38, Secs. 81-26, −32, −32.1 (Smith-Hurd Cum. Supp. 1982–1983); Ind. Code Ann. Sec. 35-1-58.5-6 (Burns Repl. Vol. 1979); Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. Sec. 436.026 (Baldwin 1982); Mo. Ann. Stat. Sec. 188.037 (Vernon Supp. 1983); Neb. Rev. Stat. Secs. 28–342, −346 (1979); Ohio Rev. Code Ann. Sec. 2919.14 (Baldwin 1981); Okla. Stat. Ann. Tit. 63, Sec. 1–735 (West Supp. 1981–1982); Pa. Stat. Ann. Tit. 18, Sec. 3213 (Supp. 1983–1984), Tit. 35, Sec. 6605(b) (Purdon 1977); Gen. Laws of R.I. Sec. 11-54-1,2 (Michie 1983 Cum. Suppl.); Tenn. Code Ann. Sec. 39–308(b) (Supp. 1981); Wyo. Stat. Sec. 35-6-115 (1977).

  12. Ill. Ann. Stat. Chap. 38, Sec. 81-26(7) (Smith-Hurd).

  13. Ill. Ann. Stat. Chap. 23, Sec. 2354 (Smith-Hurd).

  14. Flannery DM, Weisman CD, Lipsett CR, Braverman AN: Test-tube babies: Legal issues raised by in vitro fertilization. Geo Law J 1979;67:1295–1301.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927).

  16. Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U.S. 535 (1942).

  17. Comment: Artificial human reproduction: Legal problems presented by the test tube baby. Emory Law J 1979;28:1045–1056.

  18. In re Moore, 289 N.C. 95. 98, 221 S.E. 2d 307, 309 (1976).

  19. North Carolina Association for Retarded Children v. State, 420 F. Supp. 451 (M.D. N.C. 1976).

  20. Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965).

  21. Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438 (1972).

  22. Carey v. Population Services International, 431 U.S. 678 (1977).

  23. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).

  24. Planned Parenthood v. Danforth, 428 U.S. 52 (1976).

  25. Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. I (1967);Boddie v. Connecticut, 401 U.S. 371 (1970);Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U. S. 374 (1978).

  26. Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923);Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 263 U.S. 510 (1925).

  27. Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158 (1944).

  28. Maher v. Roe, 432 U.S. 464 (1977).

  29. Flannery et al.,supra note 14, p. 1315.

  30. Flanneryet al., supra note 14, p. 1317.

  31. Flanneryet al., supra note 14

  32. Lorio KV: In vitro fertilization and embryo transfer: Fertile areas for litigation. SW Law J 1982;35:973–1006.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Id.Lorio KV: In vitro fertilization and embryo transfer Fertile areas for litigation. SW Law J 1982;35:981.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Reilly P.: In vitro fertilization—a legal perspective.In Genetics and the Law, A Milunsky, GJ Annas (eds.). New York. Plenum Press, 1975, pp. 359–365.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Tuchler DJ: Man-made man and the law. St. Louis U Law J 1978;22:310–316.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Ill. Ann. Stat. Chap. 38, Sec. 81–26(7) (Smith-Hund).

  37. Ill. Ann. Stat. Chap. 23, Sec. 2354 (Smith-Hurd).

  38. Docket No. 82 C 4324.

  39. Andrews LB: Legal issues raised by in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer.In Human in Vitro Fertilization and Embryo Transfer, DP Wolf, MM Quigley (eds). 1984, pp. 11–16.

  40. Smith v. Hartigan, 556 F. Supp. 157 (N.D. Ill., 1983).

  41. Schneider v. Little Company, 151 N. W. 587, 588 (Mich. 1915).

  42. Lorio,supra note 32, p. 999.

  43. For a discussion of intentional torts in the physician-patient relationship, see Holder, A: Medical Malpractice Law, 2nd ed. New York, Wiley, 1978, Chap. 9.

    Google Scholar 

  44. For a more detailed discussion of these types of negligent treatment, see Pozgar G: Legal Aspects of Health Care Administration, 2nd ed. Rockville, MD, Aspen, 1983, Chap. 4.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Holder,supra note 43, p. 53.

  46. Holder,supra note 43, p. 53.

  47. Holder,supra note 43, p. 59.

  48. Holder,supra note 43, p. 258.

  49. Grobstein C, Flower M, Mendeloff J: External human fertilization: An evaluation of policy. Science 1983;222:127–129.

    Google Scholar 

  50. American Fertility Society: Minimal standards for programs of in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 1984;41:13.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Hershev N, Miller RD: Human Experimentation and the Law. Germantown, MD, Aspen, 1976, p. 147.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Holder,supra note 43, p. 230.

  53. Holder,supra note 43, p. 230.

  54. Holder,supra note 43, pp. 225–230.

  55. Holder,supra note 43, p. 226.

  56. Pozgar,supra note 44, p. 98; Kapp MB: Prescribing approved drugs for nonapproved uses: Physician's disclosure obligations to their patients. Law Med Health Care 1981;Oct:20–22.

  57. Kapp,supra note 56, p. 22.

  58. Kapp,supra note 56

  59. Pozgar,supra note 44, p. 99.

  60. Walters L: Human in vitro fertilization: A review of the ethical literature, Hastings Center Report, Aug 1979, pp. 23–28.

  61. Holder,supra note 43, p. 231.

  62. Walters,supra note 60, p. 28.

  63. Pozgar,supra note 44, p. 102.

  64. Walters,supra note 60, p. 28.

  65. 45 C.F.R. Secs. 46.116 and 46.117.

  66. 45 C.F.R. Sec. 46.116(a)(1).

  67. 45 C.F.R. Sec. 46.116(b)(1).

  68. Katz B: Legal implications and regulation of in vitro fertilization.In Genetics and the Law II, A Milunsky, GJ Annas (eds). New York, Plenum Press, 1979, pp. 351–359.

    Google Scholar 

  69. 74 Civ 3588 (S.D. N.Y.). For contemporary accounts of the Del Zio trial, see Test-tube bereavement.Newsweek, July 31, 1978, p. 70; N.Y. Times, July 18, 1978, p. B9, col. 1; N.Y. Times, July 19, 1978, p. A18, col. 4; N. Y. Times, July 29, 1978, p. A16, col. 6; N.Y. Times, Aug 19, 1978, p. 209 (supplementary material filed during newspaper strike); Powledge TM: A report from the Del Zio trial, Hastings Center Report, Oct 1978, p. 15. For the views of one of the treating physicians, see Sweeney WJ, Goldsmith LS: Test-tube babies: Medical and legal considerations. J Legal Med 1980;2∶1; Sweeney WJ, Goldsmith LS: Will test tube babies spawn legal problems? Legal Aspects Med Pract 1979;Oct:30.

  70. Powledge,supra note 69, p. 16.

  71. Quoted by Sweeney WJ, Goldsmith LS: Test-tube babies: Medical and legal considerations. J Legal Med 1980;2: 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Palm MT: Legal implications of artificial conception: Making babies makes law. Med Trial Tech Q 1982;28:404–422.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Holder,supra note 43, p. 24.

  74. Holder,supra note 43, p. 23.

  75. Katz,supra note 68, p. 359.

  76. Andrews,supra note 39, p. 24.

  77. Lorio,supra note 32, p. 1000.

  78. Persky MS: Wrongful life: The dawning of a new cause of action in Illinois? Ill B J 1983;June:594–597.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Note: In vitro fertilization: Hope for childless couples breeds legal exposure for physicians. U Rich Law Rev 1983;17:311–339.

  80. Annas GJ: Righting the wrong of “wrongful life,” Hastings Center Report, Feb 1981, pp. 8–9.

  81. Curlender v. Bio-Science Laboratories, 165 Cal. Rptr. 477, 488 (1980).

  82. Persky,supra note 78, p. 598; Lorio,supra note 32, p. 1004.

  83. Turpin v. Sortini, 643 P. 2d 954, 964 (Calif. 1982).

  84. Calif. Civ. Code Sec. 43.6(a) (Deering 1982) (only bars actions by child against parents; physicians remain liable); Minn. Stat. Ann. Sec. 145.424 (West Supp. 1983); S.D. Cod. Laws Sec. 25–55-1 (1981 Supp.); Utah Code Ann. Secs. 78-11-23 to-25 (1983).

  85. Cohen M: The “brave new baby” and the law: Fashioning remedies for the victims of in vitro fertilization. Am J Law Med 1978;4:319.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Id.: The “brave new baby” and the law: Fashioning remedies for the victims of in vitro fertilization. Am J Law Med 1978;4:p. 335.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Synek and Fanta, Attorneys at Law, 111 West Washington Street, Suite 1040, 60602, Chicago, Illinois

    John C. Fanta

Authors
  1. John C. Fanta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

This article is intended to provide general knowledge only. For legal advice, readers should consult competent legal counsel. Unless another meaning is obvious from the context, the masculine pronoun should be read to include the ferminine.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fanta, J.C. Legal issues raised by in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer in the United States. J Assist Reprod Genet 2, 65–86 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01139338

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01139338

Key Words

Search

Navigation