Artificial Intelligence in Embryo Selection: Ethical Considerations

In Australia, artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being used in fertility clinics to assist doctors in selecting embryos for patients undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF). Researchers have raised concerns that this reliance on AI could strip away the human element in such a personal process, potentially leading to dehumanizing experiences for both parents and their future children.

According to a recent paper by bioethics researchers, the unchecked use of machine learning technology to determine which embryos are chosen for implantation may undermine public confidence in fertility clinics. Professor Catherine Mills, who leads the Reproduction in Society research group at Monash University and is co-author of the paper, cautions that many IVF patients may be unaware if AI was involved in selecting their embryos or how the algorithms making these decisions were developed.

One of the significant risks highlighted by the researchers is the possibility of unintended biases within AI systems. The algorithms may perform differently based on various factors, such as ethnicity, potentially leading to unequal treatment among patients. Additionally, AI might use criteria that patients might not wish to influence their decisions, such as gender or genetic traits linked to disease that might disproportionately affect specific groups.

The growth of the fertility industry in Australia is notable, with an estimated revenue of US$922.9 million in 2023, projected to reach US$1.63 billion by 2030. While some clinics have begun utilizing AI for embryo selection, its overall prevalence and effectiveness remain unclear. Mills expressed that as this technology becomes more common, crucial conversations about its ethical implications and the consent of patients are lacking.

Dr. Julian Koplin, a lead author of the paper, emphasized that despite the potential advantages of AI, there are currently no strict guidelines, regulations, or requirements for clinics to inform patients about its use. Some individuals may prefer not to have machines determine critical aspects of their family planning, highlighting the need for transparency.

Koplin noted the sensitivity of this issue, stating that decisions related to who is brought into the world require careful handling. While AI can streamline processes, reduce costs, and lessen the emotional toll of IVF, patients should be fully informed and given the option to opt in or out of its use.

Petra Wale, president of the Fertility Society of Australia and New Zealand, confirmed that AI is being used mainly as a supportive tool for embryologists. The final decision regarding embryo selection still rests with trained professionals, ensuring that human judgment retains a central role in the process.

Moreover, Wale noted that AI brings several benefits, including standardized evaluations, greater efficiency, and reduced variability in decisions made by different embryologists. However, as these technologies evolve, ongoing discussions about ethics and transparency are paramount.

Research from Monash Bioethics Centre shows that while some patients are hopeful that AI could provide more information to enhance their chances of conception, there's a feeling of disconnection for others who find the process already challenging. Interviewed patients expressed concerns that increased reliance on technology could strip away the human connection essential to their IVF experience.

AI, ethics, IVF