Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT02225171

Physicians' Experiences With and Attitudes Toward Non-Medical Sex Selection Through Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is an assisted reproductive technology (ART) by which embryos, created through in vitro fertilization (IVF), can be screened for genetic conditions or traits before they are implanted into a woman s uterus. Within the past few years, a controversial non-medical use of PGD has gained recognition as having possible significant ethical implications. Non-medical sex selection (NMSS) describes the use of PGD technology to choose the sex of a child for social, as opposed to medical, reasons. In the US and a select few other countries, it is legal to use NMSS for family balancing, or the intentional selection of an underrepresented sex to balance a family where the majority of the children are of one sex. Proponents of family balancing believe that NMSS is an expression of reproductive autonomy and is ethically acceptable on those grounds. Opponents are more likely to cite beneficence (toward the existing children and the potential future child) and justice (resource allocation and access, for example) as the basis for concerns around NMSS and family balancing specifically. In the US and other countries, healthcare providers (HCPs) are often the gatekeepers to this technology. There is little research exploring the experiences of HCPs with PGD and NMSS. The Moral Experience framework (Hunt and Carnevale, 2011) is useful for understanding the potential concerns of HCPs as well as their feelings and behaviors evoked by lived and hypothetical experiences around NMSS. Also of interest is how HCPs feel that decisions about NMSS are made and their preferences as to how they should be made. Finally, there is concern that NMSS may be the first in a line of non-medical uses for PGD and that a slippery slope toward what some describe as designer babies will follow. We are interested in eliciting the traits that HCPs believe are hypothetically appropriate or inappropriate for PGD and how they make the distinction. Interviews with HCPs (OBGYNs and reproductive endocrinologists) on these topics will be transcribed and subjected to thematic analysis in order to identify common themes. An understanding of the experiences and attitudes of this stakeholder population can help clarify current issues at individual, societal, and global levels and future directions for research and policy....

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Observational

Primary location

National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI), 9000 Rockville Pike

Bethesda, Maryland, 20892, United States

About this study

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is an assisted reproductive technology (ART) by which embryos, created through in vitro fertilization (IVF), can be screened for genetic conditions or traits before they are implanted into a woman s uterus. Within the past few years, a controversial non-medical use of PGD has gained recognition as having possible significant ethical implications. Non-medical sex selection (NMSS) describes the use of PGD technology to choose the sex of a child for social, as opposed to medical, reasons. In the US and a select few other countries, it is legal to use NMSS for family balancing, or the intentional selection of an underrepresented sex to balance a family where the majority of the children are of one sex. Proponents of family balancing believe that NMSS is an expression of reproductive autonomy and is ethically acceptable on those grounds. Opponents are more likely to cite beneficence (toward the existing children and the potential future child) and justice (resource allocation and access, for example) as the basis for concerns around NMSS and family balancing specifically. In the US and other countries, healthcare providers (HCPs) are often the gatekeepers to this technology. There is little research exploring the experiences of HCPs with PGD and NMSS. The Moral Experience framework (Hunt and Carnevale, 2011) is useful for understanding the potential concerns of HCPs as well as their feelings and behaviors evoked by lived and hypothetical experiences around NMSS. Also of interest is how HCPs feel that decisions about NMSS are made and their preferences as to how they should be made. Finally, there is concern that NMSS may be the first in a line of non-medical uses for PGD and that a slippery slope toward what some describe as designer babies will follow. We are interested in eliciting the traits that HCPs believe are hypothetically appropriate or inappropriate for PGD and how they make the distinction. Interviews with HCPs (OBGYNs and reproductive endocrinologists) on these topics will be transcribed and subjected to thematic analysis in order to identify common themes. An understanding of the experiences and attitudes of this stakeholder population can help clarify current issues at individual, societal, and global levels and future directions for research and policy.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

  • INCLUSION CRITERIA:

Participants must:

  • speak English
  • be at least 18 years of age
  • currently be practicing in a clinical setting in the US
  • have familiarity with PGD i.e. have discussed PGD with a patient or colleague in any context

Treatment and study plan

Primary outcomes

  1. Experiences

    Time frame: Enrollment

    This study seeks to describe the experiences of healthcare providers around pre- implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) for non-medical sex selection (NMSS), with a particular focus on potential ethical concerns, their role in the decision-making process, and their views on future appropriate and inappropriate non-medical uses of PGD.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI)

Nih

Registry information

Important dates

Study start
2014
Primary completion
2014
Study completion
2014
First posted
Aug 26, 2014
Registry last updated
Dec 15, 2023

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.