You Say To-may-to, I say To-mah-to?

This just out: The Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) issued a new report “Defining Embryo Donation.” In the report, the committee states that use of the term “adoption” regarding embryos is “inaccurate and misleading” and cites concerns that attempts to extend an adoption model to embryos places an inappropriate burden on patients seeking an embryo donation.

It seems the infertility docs don’t much like the current business models of several companies like Snowflakes (www.nightlight.org). They want embryos to be donated, not adopted. Why? What’s the big deal?
A rose by any other name is just a rose, right? What does it matter what we call it? The adoption language surrounding embryos makes lots of folks uncomfortable - think home studies, adoption papers, and the like. Why? Part of it is the troubling practice of giving an embryo the same rights as a child – obviously a political landmine. Though I like the idea of a bio-parent being allowed to choose some aspects of the birth parents, the price tag of adoption is what gets my goat the most.

Calling embryo donation “adoption” means some well-meaning folks who run embryo adoption agencies now need the funds to run such organizations. In other words, what may be free at your infertility doc’s office, may run you $10 grand at the agency. Sometimes, it’s more than a question of semantics. If you’re interested in embryo donation, do your homework and talk to your infertility provider first.

Source: The Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, American Society for Reproductive Medicine: defining embryo donation, Fertility and Sterility, Vol.92, No. 6, December 2009.