Our Unsure Future: Legislation in the Age of Emerging Reproductive Technology

If you could choose the traits of your future child, would you? If given the opportunity to escape the physical pain of childbirth, would you take it? For years, dystopian mass media has predicted a future in which designer babies are centripetal to societal progress. Authors like Aldous Huxley and Margaret Atwood entertain futuristic dystopias in which reproduction and parenthood are systematic and efficient with fetal outcomes predetermined and highly manipulated. While these science fiction depictions are distant fantasies for now, their representation of the future of reproductive technologies is not far from the truth. 

Nevertheless, in a country fraught with stringent abortion bans and omnipresent controversy surrounding abortion legislation, such developments of futuristic reproductive technologies often bring new legal and social challenges. Since the landmark overturning of the Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade , abortion legislation has been both inconsistent and uncertain across state lines. The radical development of new-age reproductive technologies further complicates the legislative and social aspects of abortion controversy, thus calling into question existing abortion legislation and reproductive freedom. 

Today, the development of reproductive technologies is rapid and not entirely removed from Huxley and Atwood’s futuristic fictions. Research efforts ​​center upon treatments for infertility (e.g., in-vitro gametogenesis, in-vitro fertilization, etc.), and treatment for babies born preterm (namely, ectogestation). With the development of ectogestational technologies, abortion legislation is once again placed in a precarious position, with questions of “viability” often determining the extent of reproductive freedom in affected states.

Ectogestation can be defined as the scientific practice of growing a fetus in an artificial womb outside of a parent’s body. When performed successfully, the process allows for greater maturation of a fetus before birth, thereby providing a solution for babies born preterm to develop further before entering post-birth care. The prospect of utilizing ectogestation for an entire term of human pregnancy is decades away, but its usage in the second or third trimester of pregnancy is imminent. 

Ectogestation presents an exciting future with lower infant mortality rates and better outcomes for preterm deliveries of wanted pregnancies. Current methods for treating underdeveloped preterm infants are oftentimes dangerous, invasive, and ineffective (e.g. risk of bronchopulmonary dysplasia with breathing machine use, risk of hemorrhage with blood transfusions, etc.). With ectogestation comes the ability for preterm fetuses to further develop key organs such as the lungs and heart before birth, thus preventing the use of dangerous technologies and correlating to lower infant mortality rates. However, such technology also posits a future riddled with further abortion controversy and potential restriction of reproductive freedom for millions of U.S. citizens.

When considering abortion policy, one must first understand the term “viability,” meaning the ability of a fetus to survive outside of the womb or the point at which resuscitation would be attempted on a fetus outside of the body. In 15 U.S. states, abortion legislation bans abortion past the point of “viability” for a pregnancy, typically around 23 weeks. With ectogestational technology, fetuses born preterm become viable weeks earlier, typically around 21-22 weeks. 

For people seeking an abortion, those one to two weeks can make all the difference in their ability to legally terminate their pregnancy within their state of residence. In many situations, it could take one to two weeks to garner adequate funds to pay for an abortion, receive time off from work to travel to a clinic, or even become aware of a pregnancy in the first place. Given the continued development of ectogestational technologies capable of preponing the viability of a pregnancy, it seems unlikely that abortion legislation won’t shift to accommodate technological advancements. In states where abortion policy is decided by viability guidelines, this would restrict reproductive freedom and likely incite immense controversy between anti-choice and reproductive freedom advocates. 

Developing reproductive technologies demands attention from politicians and legal settings. Many question the democratic nature of modern-day abortion bans, as the majority of the U.S. population (78%) disagrees with total abortion bans, yet 14 states possess total bans, and two more ban abortion starting at six weeks. When placed on the ballot in key battleground states like Ohio and Virginia, citizens voted overwhelmingly in support of reproductive freedom, further demonstrating the viewpoints of the U.S. constituency, even in states that frequently vote conservatively (e.g., Kansas).

Emerging reproductive technologies represent a trepidatious yet promising future full of hope for lower infant and maternal mortality rates. Yet, such advancements will likely be accompanied by abortion legislation and restriction of reproductive rights. As rapidly developing reproductive technologies continue to impact healthcare and legislation, controversy surrounding the development of reproductive technologies must be accompanied by meaningful social discussions in order for the technology to progress and be utilized in legitimate medical settings. 

In the future, perhaps hand-picking a child’s traits will be commonplace and childbirth will lose some of its characteristic physical pains, but such a future will likely be accompanied by moral controversy and legal battles. Navigating this will undoubtedly continue to present necessary challenges, at the risk of allowing society to take a sharp turn into Huxley and Atwood’s dystopian realm of dangerous technology and predetermined fates. 

Domestic, Politics, Society, U.S., US, Science & TechnologyEmma HartmanComment