TY - JOUR
T1 - Regulating preimplantation genetic testing across the world
T2 - A comparison of international policy and ethical perspectives
AU - Ginoza, Margaret E.C.
AU - Isasi, Rosario
N1 - Funding Information:
Partially supported (R.I.) by the Chinese Academy of Science President’s International Fellowship Initiative (PIFI). The opinions expressed above are those of the authors alone.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press; all rights reserved;.
PY - 2020/5
Y1 - 2020/5
N2 - Preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) is a reproductive technology that, in the course of in vitro fertilization (IVF), allows prospective parents to select their future offspring based on genetic characteristics. PGT could be seen as an exercise of reproductive liberty, thus poten-tially raising significant socioethical and legal controversy. In this review, we examine—from a comparative perspective—variations in policy approaches to the regulation of PGT. We draw on a sample of 19 countries (Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Netherlands, Singapore, South Korea, Switzerland, United Kingdom, and the United States) to provide a global landscape of the spectrum of policy and legislative approaches (e.g., restrictive to permissive, public vs. private models). We also explore central socioethical and policy issues and contentious applications, including permissibility criteria (e.g., medical necessity), nonmedical sex selection, and reproductive tourism. Finally, we further outline genetic counseling requirements across policy approaches.
AB - Preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) is a reproductive technology that, in the course of in vitro fertilization (IVF), allows prospective parents to select their future offspring based on genetic characteristics. PGT could be seen as an exercise of reproductive liberty, thus poten-tially raising significant socioethical and legal controversy. In this review, we examine—from a comparative perspective—variations in policy approaches to the regulation of PGT. We draw on a sample of 19 countries (Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Netherlands, Singapore, South Korea, Switzerland, United Kingdom, and the United States) to provide a global landscape of the spectrum of policy and legislative approaches (e.g., restrictive to permissive, public vs. private models). We also explore central socioethical and policy issues and contentious applications, including permissibility criteria (e.g., medical necessity), nonmedical sex selection, and reproductive tourism. Finally, we further outline genetic counseling requirements across policy approaches.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85081200862&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85081200862&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1101/cshperspect.a036681
DO - 10.1101/cshperspect.a036681
M3 - Article
C2 - 31506325
AN - SCOPUS:85081200862
VL - 10
JO - Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine
JF - Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine
SN - 2157-1422
IS - 5
M1 - a036681
ER -