The freezing of ova, temporarily at least, has seemed to have put to rest the mind of many who wished for In Vitro Fertilisation while bypassing the need to freeze embryos

A lot of consideration however still has to be taken into account before such a venue is taken, and especially if (as it should) the procedure must have procedures backed by law. Let us take an example:

If we do not legalise how long the frozen eggs can be kept, apart from the cost being incurred by the government, women may choose the right to freeze their eggs at a young age in order to have babies at a later date. This proposal was put forward by a British IVF specialist Gillian Lockwood. Quoting from BioEdge: “Because of ‘social, educational, emotional and financial pressures’ many women are not ready for child-bearing until their late 30s, when their fertility has already declined significantly. But ‘freezing a woman’s eggs at age 30 literally ‘freezes in time’ her fertility potential and gives her the chance of a healthy pregnancy at a time of her choosing.”

So much for those who thought that the only problem with IVF was the freezing of embryos. Even if we had to assume that couples have to be legally married in order to benefit from this; and even if we had to assume that most couples will sincerely seek the immediate use of the service, one cannot assume that we can simply throw eggs which belong to a woman away. Someone may have a baby through IVF but ask that her ova be kept for future use; a date, of course of her choice.

I find that this kind of manipulation on how and when we have babies can be more dangerous than the responsible freezing of a few embryos which the couple is obliged to use within a stipulated time period. Unless we do the same with ova, we will end up having to keep these ova alive. If anyone thinks that you can throw ova away, I think they are grossly mistaken. They are not without moral weight and they remain the property of the mother. Unless people enter into this procedure with clear guidelines we can head for trouble.

Again, if we think that the freezing of ova is not morally problematic, what is going to stop someone from offering a private service to young women, even in their early 20s, from freezing a few eggs? Can we honestly think about a law regulating even this when the issue is not tackled for those who actually need treatment? There is so much you can infringe on personal liberties.

One has also to consider that even if the service is offered only to married people, unmarried people may have a claim on medical grounds – a clear example would be someone who needs radiotherapy. This service has never seen objection when offered to males who need to undergo radiotherapy; so can we withhold it from women? I think not.

Even if this service is not abused by those who wish to preserve some eggs until after they finish university, even though they are fertile; the problem would remain for those who are infertile and wish to keep those eggs for a later date. Again, would a woman be allowed to donate those eggs to a friend? Even if the hospital would not offer the service, there is nothing to keep her from taking custody and people going in private laboratories. None of this is beyond reasonable imagination and when you consider the requests we doctors hear, nothing surprises us. The latest was a woman who wished to donate her child (conceived, it seems, outside marriage) but without informing her husband (if this were physically possible, unless he is a moron) and registering the child as if he had been born by the would-be mother.

But perhaps we also need to heed the news that ICSI, the intracytoplasmic injection of sperm, has not been studied as much as IVF, and it appears that there is a higher incidence of birth defects in ICSI babies than in those from normal IVF.

Pierre Mallia is Associate Professor in Family Medicine, Patients’ Rights and Bioethics at the University of Malta; he is also Ethics Advisor to the Medical Council of Malta. He is also former president of the Malta College of Family Doctors