IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v71y2010i12p2204-2211.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fresh or frozen? Classifying 'spare' embryos for donation to human embryonic stem cell research

Author

Listed:
  • Ehrich, Kathryn
  • Williams, Clare
  • Farsides, Bobbie

Abstract

United Kingdom (UK) funding to build human embryonic stem cell (hESC) derivation labs within assisted conception units (ACU) was intended to facilitate the 'In-vitro fertilisation (IVF)-stem cell interface', including the flow of fresh 'spare' embryos to stem cell labs. However, in the three sites reported on here, which received this funding, most of the embryos used for hESC research came from long term cryopreservation storage and/or outside clinics. In this paper we explore some of the clinical, technical, social and ethical factors that might help to explain this situation. We report from our qualitative study of the ethical frameworks for approaching women/couples for donation of embryos to stem cell research. Members of staff took part in 44 interviews and six ethics discussion groups held at our study sites between February 2008 and October 2009. We focus here on their articulations of social and ethical, as well as scientific, dimensions in the contingent classification of 'spare' embryos, entailing uncertainty, fluidity and naturalisation in classifying work. Social and ethical factors include acknowledging and responding to uncertainty in classifying embryos; retaining 'fluidity' in the grading system to give embryos 'every chance'; tensions between standardisation and variation in enacting a 'fair' grading system; enhancement of patient choice and control, and prevention of regret; and incorporation of patients' values in construction of ethically acceptable embryo 'spareness' ('frozen' embryos, and embryos determined through preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) to be genetically 'affected'). We argue that the success of the 'built moral environment' of ACU with adjoining stem cell laboratories building projects intended to facilitate the 'IVF-stem cell interface' may depend not only on architecture, but also on the part such social and ethical factors play in configuration of embryos as particular kinds of moral work objects.

Suggested Citation

  • Ehrich, Kathryn & Williams, Clare & Farsides, Bobbie, 2010. "Fresh or frozen? Classifying 'spare' embryos for donation to human embryonic stem cell research," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(12), pages 2204-2211, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:71:y:2010:i:12:p:2204-2211
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(10)00723-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Roberts, Celia & Throsby, Karen, 2008. "Paid to share: IVF patients, eggs and stem cell research," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 159-169, January.
    2. Ehrich, Kathryn & Williams, Clare & Scott, Rosamund & Sandall, Jane & Farsides, Bobbie, 2006. "Social welfare, genetic welfare? Boundary-work in the IVF/PGD clinic," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(5), pages 1213-1224, September.
    3. Parry, Sarah, 2006. "(Re)constructing embryos in stem cell research: Exploring the meaning of embryos for people involved in fertility treatments," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(10), pages 2349-2359, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Haimes, Erica, 2013. "Juggling on a rollercoaster? Gains, loss and uncertainties in IVF patients' accounts of volunteering for a U.K. ‘egg sharing for research’ scheme," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 45-51.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Waldby, Catherine & Kerridge, Ian & Boulos, Margaret & Carroll, Katherine, 2013. "From altruism to monetisation: Australian women's ideas about money, ethics and research eggs," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 34-42.
    2. Williams, Clare & Ehrich, Kathryn & Farsides, Bobbie & Scott, Rosamund, 2007. "Facilitating choice, framing choice: Staff views on widening the scope of preimplantation genetic diagnosis in the UK," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(6), pages 1094-1105, September.
    3. Saniei, Mansooreh, 2013. "Human embryonic stem cell science and policy: The case of Iran," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 345-350.
    4. Pfeffer, Naomi, 2008. "What British women say matters to them about donating an aborted fetus to stem cell research: A focus group study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(12), pages 2544-2554, June.
    5. Zarhin, Dana & Negev, Maya & Vulfsons, Simon & Sznitman, Sharon R., 2018. "Rhetorical and regulatory boundary-work: The case of medical cannabis policy-making in Israel," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 217(C), pages 1-9.
    6. Johnson, Katherine M., 2013. "Making families: Organizational boundary work in US egg and sperm donation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 64-71.
    7. Roberts, Celia & Throsby, Karen, 2008. "Paid to share: IVF patients, eggs and stem cell research," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 159-169, January.
    8. Kent, Julie, 2008. "The fetal tissue economy: From the abortion clinic to the stem cell laboratory," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 67(11), pages 1747-1756, December.
    9. Miner, Skye A., 2019. "Demarcating the dirty work: Canadian Fertility professionals’ use of boundary-work in contentious egg donation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 221(C), pages 19-26.
    10. Delaunay, Catarina & Gouveia, Luís & Santos, Mário JDS. & Morais, Rita, 2023. "(De)Bonding with embryos: The emotional choreographies of Portuguese IVF patients," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 321(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:71:y:2010:i:12:p:2204-2211. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.