Research Paper on Social Egg Freezing

Introduction

The dusk of the twentieth centuries has witness limitless technological innovations aimed at improving the living standards of human beings through population control. By 1960, the field of reproductive science had already witnessed countless developments of contraceptives for both men and women. But it was until 1970 when in-vitro fertilization (IVF) was introduced to assisted women above 35years in reproduction due to the rising number of delayed childbearing influenced by the rising number of career women (Murphy, 2012). Since the introduction of IVF, numerous scientific improvements have been made to "revolutionize" reproduction through laboratory techniques. The latest technology on the biology of fertility is the use of Oocyte cryopreservation. This technique involves the preservation of the female egg for future use under subzero temperature for either medical or social reasons. This technology was earlier used for assisting women with cancer to have children. However, the technique others use in women who wanted to preserve their fertility for future use hence it was dubbed "social freezing". Ever since the introduction of this technique in the early 1980's, there has been debates over the legal, ethical, economic and health issue that surround this technology. Therefore, this essay takes a look at the use of Oocyte cryopreservation technique in reproductive health and some of the factors that make this technology controversial ever since its first success.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

The History of Oocyte Cryopreservation

The development of the Oocyte cryopreservation which is commonly known as social egg freezing has not been a case of overnight success. The early techniques of social egg freezing involved the use of rapid-thaw of slow freezing as the main methods of social egg freezing. These methods, however, recorded massive failure that was mainly as a result of intracellular freezing which causes poor devotement of the embryo and defects on the chromosomes (De Melo-Martin & Cholst, 2008). It was until 1986 when the first successful childbirth involving social egg freezing was recorded (Van Uem et al., 1987). However, the introduction of a flash-freezing technique called vitrification changes the fate of social egg freezing. Despite the early warning from medical practitioners, the vitrification technique resulted in a positive outcome that pushed the government to embrace this procedure. The American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) approved the social egg freezing and declared that it is no longer be considered experimental (Mertes & Pennings, 2012). Social egg freezing has ever since received a lot of media attention and has become a matter of public discussion.

Professional Issues on Social Egg Freezing

Before 2012, social egg freezing was a considered an issue under laboratory experiments until its authorization in October 2012 by ASRM (Mertes & Pennings, 2012). But what made scientists dig deeper into research that is considered a breakthrough in the modern biology of the facility is the main topic of discussion. First, the ideology of feminism has been at the heart of the public debate for almost a century. The first wave of feminism involved the debate of the equality in places of work which has improved tremendously in the past century. However, it is the second wave of feminism that has raised a lot of question about the motherhood as natural role of the women. A feminist anthropologist Ortner (1972) wrote an article "Is Female to Male as Nature is to Culture?" where she considers women more attached to nature because of their productivity. On the other hand, men are unproductive and thus become more associated with art, politics and define the culture that oppresses women. It is the push-and-pull between nature and culture that has brought the issue of motherhood and work at the center of this debate. Therefore, the major proponent that has made women favor the use of this procedure because of their desire to achieve educational, financial and career goals before they embark on motherhood responsibility.

To support the idea of equality in workplaces major technological corporations in the world have embraces this procedure. In 2014, Apple and Facebook announced that they would fund for any women employees who are willing to undergo this procedure (Tran, 2014). The move by this corporations has influenced the human resource of other corporation to consider this approach to improve gender balance in the places of work. As a result, the corporate society in America is now supporting this procedure in a move to improve professionalism in the places of work and productivity among the employees. Inhorn (2013) published an article where she lauded social egg freezing as a "game changer" that will enable women to "have it all" instead of having to choose between their career and baring biological children. She argued that most women at their twenties are filled with desires to have a career like other modern women but are caught in the dilemma of having to choose between their social responsibility of reproduction and their dreams. She urges all women to consider social egg freezing and postpone childbearing and first achieve their desire in life (Inhorn, 2017). For this reason, career and education have been considered the most acknowledged reasons why women have embraced social egg freezing.

Social Issues Surrounding Social Egg Freezing

Paul (2013) describes the idea of autonomy and how it plays a major role in influencing the decisions of women in the society in his articles "Feminist Intuitions and the Normative Substance of Autonomy." In the discussion of the social issues related to social egg freezing, the idea of autonomy and women independence is always brought forth. In this article, Paul (2013) discusses how feminism has brought a new perception of the personal identity of women as far as politics and sociocultural idea are concerned. In this case, women are found in a social dilemma between what the corporate market requires of them and whether they should consider what the society expects of them. Therefore the question of whether women should embrace social egg freezing is exclusively for them to decide.

Many critics have argued that bringing the idea of autonomy in this discussion is a selfish move by women who put their interest first. In their argument, women abandon their social responsibility to satisfy their personal career goals. On a contrary point of view, Emily (2016) believes that there is a contradiction between the main reasons why women opt for social egg freezing and the perception of the critics. The main reason for social egg freezing according to Emily is that women opt not to bear children because they haven't found the right partners. Research shows that 90% of all the women that opt to postpone baring children do not cite the pressure from their workplaces as the reason for their decision (Martin, 2010). Most of the claim that they have not found the right man who they should have a child. Alana, Kathleen, Jennie, and Lesley (2014) also share the same school of thought with Emily. In their journal "Young Feminist Scholars of Reproductive Politics Reflect on Egg Freezing." they discuss how it has become hard for girls with a college education to find the appropriate man to have a child. As a result, they find their career to be more important than having to still into early parenthood that will limit them from achieving the objectives that have in life.

Ethical and Moral Issues

The main moral and ethical questions about social egg freezing are brought by the fear of the disposal of the excess eggs collected in the banks. The major challenge of the scientist in this technology puts the scientist in the dilemma of whether they should discard the excess eggs or keep them stored in the banks as described by Mayes, Williams, and Lipworth (2018). A report released by Pennings (2000) indicated that there is evidence of patients who were uncertain about whether to dispose or donates their embryo in the clinic. Most of then failed to reply to the hospital because they were afraid of making irreversible decisions about their health. These reports show how the collection of the embryo by the may be a case of gambling. Although there are statutes that stipulate the maximum period for social egg freezing should be ten years, there are rights to life group that question this technique (Robertson, 2014). Most of the human rights activist argue that social egg freezing is just another form of abortion. The humanitarians believe that embryos should be treated as an underdeveloped form of human beings which should be treated with equal dignity.

Emily (2016) is skeptical about the success rate of social egg freezing and the risk that it possesses to the future of the women that undergo this procedure. In her argument, she compares social egg freezing with an insurance policy that only gives a person optimism yet her fate is uncertain. She argues women to understand that the procedure is not a guarantee that they will reproduce in the future even if it acts as insurances. She concludes by questioning the ethics being "stopping the biological clock" claiming that fertility in women is limited to age and cannot be preserved. Another ethical question about social egg freezing was forwarded by Thompson (2005). Thompson insists that it is unethical, providing this services as the ultimate family planning tool without educating woman about the concept of the biological clock which is different in different women.

Kenny et al. (2013) question the idea of social egg freezing based on the risks that are involved with late pregnancy. In their research, the safety of pregnancy only is only guaranteed during the early stages of the life of a woman. As a woman approaches menopause, the risk of having health complications during pregnancy increases due to the aging factor. In their research, the childbirths that involve woman between the age of 40 and 52 are mostly through the cesarean section because of the weakened uterine muscles. There is also a risk of premature pregnancy for pregnant women at the age of 47 and below. Therefore, Kenny et al. (2013) question the ethical issue of the safety that surrounds the use of this technique to enhance reproductive biology. If the technique risks the health of women, then it should be completely disregarded.

Economic Issue

Emily (2016) is critical about the commercial potential that the social egg freezing phenomenon will bring in bio-economics once it has been medicalized. The market of selling the eggs whose own have failed to use them is a lucrative endeavor with a lot of profit. She suggests that there should be laws put in place to ensure there is regulation of egg freezing, for example, the laws in Italy that set a maximum limit for the collection of eggs for each clinic. Another economic issue that Emily stressed is about the cost of this procedure. As much as it is hailed as the "ultimate family planning technology," it is only a few women in the entire population that will access this services. The lowest amount of money to be paid for a standard procedure of egg freezing is $4000. This price will only favor high-income women leaving the middle income and poor women out of these services.

Cooper and Waldby also wrote articles (Cooper & Waldby, 2014 and Waldby, 2015) raising their concern for a rise of businesses that may exploit desperate poor women. The global market for eggs is entirely uncontrolled posing a risk of a rise of a business where economically disadvantaged women sell their eggs to the clinic. Just like their cases where poor people sell their organs out of desperation, the same scenario is likely to be whiteness in the egg market. This eggs will then be sold to old women that can a...