Artificial Gametes
Printer-friendly versionA FUTURE ROUTE FOR REPRODUCTION OR AN UNREALITY?
Zubin Master, PhD
Sprott Centre for Stem Cell Research
Several scientific papers have shown that both eggs and sperm (known as gametes) can be created by artificial means. These scientific findings piqued the curiosity of bioethicists on the use of artificial eggs and sperm for infertility treatment. Artificial gametes can be created from embryonic stem (ES) cells, which come from embryos that were created in a laboratory. Theoretically speaking, artificial gametes may also be created such that someone’s genes are contained within eggs or sperm cells. If such techniques were feasible, it might be possible to create children that are genetically related to two men or two women (explained in Master, 2006). The creation and use of artificial gametes for fertility treatment raises several obvious ethical concerns. The aim of this article is to highlight some of the ethical questions on the potential use of artificial gametes to create children. The ethical issues I will review are the potential physical and psychological (mental-emotional) harms to children who may be created from the use of artificial gametes.
The science behind artificial gametes
In 2003, several scientific publications reported that research using mice showed that both eggs and sperm can be derived from cells (called ES cells) from early stage embryos that were originally created by in vitro fertilization (IVF). It has also been proposed that artificial gametes may be created from your own cells through the use of a variety of extremely scientifically sophisticated and relatively novel experimental techniques (for further details refer to Nagy and Chang, 2007; Nagy et al., 2008). Moreover, artificial gametes may theoretically be created in such ways as to put someone else’s genes into either sperm cells or into eggs (Master, 2006). Imagine a man’s genes inside an egg which can then be fertilized by his male partner’s sperm, and, in theory, allow for the creation of a child who is genetically-related to two men. The same may also supposedly be performed for women, although even greater technical hurdles may be needed to be surpassed in order to create a child genetically related to two women.
It is, however, important to stress that the science of artificial gamete technology is in its infancy. Many of the scientific methods that can be used to create artificial gametes, including gametes that contain someone’s genes, have never been experimentally accomplished in humans. However, the creation of children in the above ways can be theoretically proposed based on our current understanding of developmental biology and human reproduction. Although much of this research has been done in mice, it has relevance for clinical application to human beings. At present, the discovery of making artificial gametes from ES cells is of most value for basic scientific research, while clinical applications remain only a hypothetical possibility (Daley, 2007). The functionality of artificial gametes is still in question, as more animal-based experiments are needed to show that artificial gametes can be used to create offspring. Moreover, it should be noted that the creation and/or use of human artificial gametes may not be permitted, due to national or state-level laws, or other types of social policies, which may prohibit certain practices in research or in assisted reproduction. At this stage, such discussions are speculative, but simply because the science and technology may not be feasible at present does not prevent us from discussing the various ethical issues surrounding this technology.
Ethical issues of artificial gametes
Physical harms to children argument
There are several ethical issues that arise when talking about artificial gametes. One of the main issues is the safety of using artificial gametes. Even if artificial gametes can be proven to be scientifically feasible and practical in creating offspring in animals, they must pass several rigorous safety standards prior to their use in clinical/human research for a couple of reasons. First, it remains unknown whether offspring created from same sex parents would have any biological problems (Whittaker, 2007). Second, the genetic quality of artificial gametes may be less than optimal, which could lead to physical harms to children. However, Testa and Harris (2005) state that an ethical objection based on creating artificial gametes with poor genetic quality alone would not be “reasonable,” because the genetic quality of gametes from human donors depreciates with age, thus also potentially resulting in gametes of poor genetic quality. On the other hand, the use of artificial gametes with poor genetic quality, coupled with the use of assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs), such as intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), may potentially increase the number of genetic mutations in the gametes or embryos, resulting in physical harm to children in the form of congenital defects (Master, 2006).
The ethical problem in talking about the harms to children from ART is twofold. Firstly, in some cases it is difficult to pinpoint whether abnormalities in children born from IVF or ICSI versus natural conception are due to the ARTs used or due to the infertility of the patient. Secondly, harm is generally defined where one’s state is worsened due to something else. A basic example that illustrates this idea of harm is a healthy individual who is temporarily immobilized, or has lifelong mobility issues, due to an accident. The individual is considered harmed, because the accident has put them in a worse state than prior to the accident. When attempting to apply the concept of harm to the birth of children born with congenital abnormalities, this issue becomes increasingly complex, as their previous state is non-existence (Cohen, 2000). Thus, it may be argued that a certain level of harm to children created from ARTs could be morally permissible, because it is better to be born and exist with certain “harm” than to have never existed at all.
Mental-emotional (psychological) harm to children argument
Several claims have been made that children created from artificial gametes who never had parents (or had ES cell parents) may suffer mental or emotional harm because they would come to know that they were created in an artificial manner (Newson and Smajdor, 2005). Similarly, claims have also been made to suggest that children created from artificial gametes for same sex couples would also be psychologically harmed (Newson and Smajdor, 2005). A counter argument can be made that psychological harm is unlikely because in many similar cases, studies have shown that children who have been created by ARTs (artificial means) have normal psychosocial development. Moreover, both adoption practices and ARTs have helped many others create non-traditional families, such as families with two same-sex social parents (i.e., lesbian couples), or single-parent families, where children and adolescents have normal psychosocial development (Golombok, 2005). It is thus likely that the psychological development of a child will depend on a multitude of factors beyond the means of their creation, such as the care given by parent(s), socioeconomic factors, and other influences within their social environment (Master, 2006).
A need for further moral reflection
It is important that scholars continue to provide ethical insight on the use of artificial gametes for the creation of children. It would also be equally important to conduct public opinion research, to understand the views of patients and potential users on the incorporation of artificial gametes with other ARTs. Like bioethicists, some people may feel that research involving artificial gametes is an abomination compared with natural or even artificial conception that will inevitably lead down a slippery slope towards designer children and may irreparably damage the fabric of society. Some would find it repugnant to create children genetically related to two women or two men. Others, however, will view artificial gametes as a means of increasing their reproductive liberty and providing more choices for the creation of their family. Whether one’s view is towards revulsion or procreative emancipation, further ethical reflection by everyone on artificial gametes is needed as society moves forward with this and other ARTs.
Acknowledgements
Thanks to Ms. Martha Ahmadi for review of this article.
Disclaimer
The views expressed here are strictly those of the author and do not reflect the positions of the government of Canada or of the academic institution.
Biography
Dr. Zubin Master completed his undergraduate and doctoral training in cellular and molecular biology from York University and the University of Toronto respectively. He then transitioned to bioethics and health policy research during his post-doctoral studies at Dalhousie University and the University of British Columbia. Affiliated through the Ottawa Health Research Institute of the University of Ottawa, Zubin’s conceptual research interests focus on the ethical and policy issues of stem cell research and assisted reproductive and genetic technologies. More specifically, Dr. Master’s research addresses questions surrounding moral status, reproductive liberty, intergenerational justice, and the potential harms and benefits to individuals and society of stem cell research and other novel biomedical technologies. He has provided several guest lectures and presentations in the ethics and policy of stem cells and other biomedical technologies. Zubin has published his work in numerous scientific and bioethics journals.
Author Information:
1Zubin Master, PhD
Sprott Centre for Stem Cell Research,
Regenerative Medicine Program,
Ottawa Health Research Institute
501 Smyth Road, Ottawa, ON, CANADA, K1H 8L6
613-421-3421 (W); 416-471-0965 (Mobile)
EM: zubin@zubsplace.com
Mailing Address:
145 York Street, Unit 1002,
Ottawa, ON, CANADA, K1N 8Y3
References
Cohen, C.B. 2000. “Give me children or I shall die!”: new reproductive technologies and harm to children. In: Readings in health care ethics. Ed. Elisabeth Boetzkes and Wilfrid J. Waluchow. Broadview Press Ltd. Peterborough, ON. Pp. 199-210.
Daley, G.Q. 2007. Gametes from embryonic stem cells: a cup half empty or half full? Science. 316(5823):409-410.
Golombok, S. 2005. Unusual families. Reproductive BioMedicine Online. 10(Supplemental 1):9-12.
Master, Z. 2006. Embryonic stem cell gametes: the new frontier in human reproduction. Human Reproduction. 21(4):857-863.
Nagy, Z.P. and Chang, C-C. 2007. Artificial gametes. Theriogenology. 67(1):99-104.
Nagy, Z.P. Kerkis, I. and Chang, C-C. 2008. Development of artificial gametes. Reproductive BioMedicine Online. 16(4):539-544.
Newson, A.J. and Smajdor, A.C. 2005. Artificial gametes: new paths to parenthood? Journal of Medical Ethics. 31(3):184-186.
Testa, G. and Harris, J. 2005. Ethics and synthetic gametes. Bioethics. 19(2):146-166.
Whittaker, P. 2007. Stem cells to gametes: how far should we go? Human Fertility. 10(1):1-5.