Dov Fox, Sonia Suter, Meghna Mukherjee, Stacey Pereira, Gabriel Lázaro-Muñoz
{"title":"Choosing Your \"Healthiest\" Embryo After <i>Dobbs</i>: Polygenic Screening and Distinctive Challenges for Truth in Advertising and Informed Consent.","authors":"Dov Fox, Sonia Suter, Meghna Mukherjee, Stacey Pereira, Gabriel Lázaro-Muñoz","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.4814475","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Polygenic embryo screening (\"PES\") analyzes embryos for hundreds or thousands of genomic loci to generate risk scores that estimate genetic susceptibility to conditions and traits compared to the general population. The technology is commercially marketed directly to consumers. Companies focus mostly on medical conditions, sometimes in ways that oversell its advantages and efficacy, encouraging fertility patients to \"choose your healthiest embryo\" and \"protect your future child from genetic risks.\" The advertising of PES trades on norms of children's health and good parenting and reinforces those normative ideals. While it is easy to assume PES will be constrained in practice by its clinical limitations, high cost, and health burdens associated with in vitro fertilization, inflated marketing claims could exacerbate other legal and social forces to expand its use. Since the fall of Roe v. Wade, over a dozen states have banned abortion, forcing some people to give birth to children they would not otherwise have had. Others who are denied the abortion choice may seek to recover this lost sense of agency over their reproductive lives in other ways. This article examines the risks of decision fatigue and choice overload that PES may create in prospective parents, and the distinctive challenges that PES poses for legal liability over matters of truth in advertising and informed consent.</p>","PeriodicalId":81374,"journal":{"name":"Harvard journal of law & technology","volume":"38 2 Symposium","pages":"463-478"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12470075/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Harvard journal of law & technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4814475","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Polygenic embryo screening ("PES") analyzes embryos for hundreds or thousands of genomic loci to generate risk scores that estimate genetic susceptibility to conditions and traits compared to the general population. The technology is commercially marketed directly to consumers. Companies focus mostly on medical conditions, sometimes in ways that oversell its advantages and efficacy, encouraging fertility patients to "choose your healthiest embryo" and "protect your future child from genetic risks." The advertising of PES trades on norms of children's health and good parenting and reinforces those normative ideals. While it is easy to assume PES will be constrained in practice by its clinical limitations, high cost, and health burdens associated with in vitro fertilization, inflated marketing claims could exacerbate other legal and social forces to expand its use. Since the fall of Roe v. Wade, over a dozen states have banned abortion, forcing some people to give birth to children they would not otherwise have had. Others who are denied the abortion choice may seek to recover this lost sense of agency over their reproductive lives in other ways. This article examines the risks of decision fatigue and choice overload that PES may create in prospective parents, and the distinctive challenges that PES poses for legal liability over matters of truth in advertising and informed consent.
多基因胚胎筛选(“PES”)分析胚胎的数百或数千个基因组位点,以产生风险评分,以估计与一般人群相比对条件和特征的遗传易感性。这项技术在商业上直接面向消费者销售。公司主要关注医疗条件,有时会夸大其优势和功效,鼓励生育患者“选择最健康的胚胎”,“保护你未来的孩子免受遗传风险”。PES的广告宣传了儿童健康和良好教养的规范,并强化了这些规范理想。虽然很容易认为PES在实践中会受到临床局限性、高成本和与体外受精相关的健康负担的限制,但夸大的营销声明可能会加剧其他法律和社会力量来扩大其使用。自从罗伊诉韦德案(Roe v. Wade)败诉以来,十几个州禁止了堕胎,迫使一些人生下了他们本来不会生的孩子。其他被拒绝堕胎的人可能会寻求通过其他方式恢复这种失去的对生育生活的能动性。本文探讨了PES可能给准父母带来的决策疲劳和选择过载的风险,以及PES在广告和知情同意方面对法律责任提出的独特挑战。