Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 6, 2026

Chromosome Screening of Human Preimplantation Embryos by Using Spent Culture Medium: Sample Collection and Chromosomal Ploidy Analysis
Published on: September 7, 2021
Ethical and social implications of implementing polygenic embryo screening into clinical care: A scoping review
Betty Cohn1, Dorit Barlevy2, Gabriel Lázaro-Muñoz3,4
1Institute for Public Health Genetics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
Insights
Polygenic embryo screening (PES) offers potential reproductive benefits but faces ethical concerns regarding its clinical validity and equitable access. Further research is needed to address scientific limitations and standardize counseling for this emerging technology.
Area of Science:
- Biomedical Ethics
- Reproductive Technology
- Genetic Screening
Background:
- Polygenic embryo screening (PES) is an emerging application of polygenic risk scores in in vitro fertilization.
- Commercialization of PES lacks professional guidelines, raising significant ethical and social concerns.
- Existing academic literature lacks a synthesized overview of the ethical landscape surrounding PES.
Purpose of the Study:
- To map the ethical and sociocultural issues associated with polygenic embryo screening (PES).
- To synthesize the ethical considerations of PES by analyzing academic literature.
Main Methods:
- A scoping review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines, searching PubMed, Web of Science, and PhilPapers.
- A total of 399 articles were identified, with 54 included after abstract and full-text review.
- Ethical analysis utilized the four principles of biomedical ethics (beneficence, autonomy, non-maleficence, justice) and inductive thematic coding.
Main Results:
- Beneficence concerns include uncertain clinical utility and net benefit.
- Autonomy issues involve informed consent, counseling challenges, and respect for future offspring.
- Non-maleficence relates to pleiotropy, IVF risks, psychological harm, and clinician bias.
- Justice concerns encompass access inequality, eugenics fears, and demographic impacts.
- Sociocultural aspects involve condition vs. trait definitions, 'healthy' concepts, and disability critiques.
Conclusions:
- Proponents highlight reproductive choice and health benefits of PES.
- Critics emphasize unresolved scientific limitations and significant ethical/sociocultural concerns.
- The commercial growth of PES necessitates further study on its validity, utility, and standardized counseling.
Purpose:
Polygenic embryo screening (PES), or preimplantation genetic testing for polygenic conditions/traits, is an emerging application of polygenic risk scores within in vitro fertilization. Marketed commercially to prospective parents with limited professional guidelines, PES raises ethical and social concerns. To date, no scoping review has synthesized the ethical landscape of PES. Our study addresses this gap by mapping ethical and sociocultural issues across academic literature.
Methods:
Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, in September 2024, we searched PubMed, Web of Science, and PhilPapers, yielding a total of 399 articles. After abstract screening and full-text review, the final dataset included 54 articles. Using the 4 principles of biomedical ethics - beneficence, autonomy, non-maleficence, and justice-as an a priori codebook alongside inductive thematic coding, we analyzed how PES is ethically evaluated.
Results:
Under beneficence, concerns emerged over clinical validity/utility and uncertain net benefit. Autonomy-related discussions emphasized informed consent and counseling challenges, decision-making shaped by incomplete or biased information, appeals to procreative beneficence, tensions surrounding reproductive autonomy, and respect for the autonomy of future offspring. Non-maleficence concerns included pleiotropy, increased medical risks from in vitro fertilization pursued solely for PES, psychological harms, and clinician-driven embryo selection. Justice subthemes included unequal access to PES, fears of eugenics, stigmatization/discrimination, and potential demographic impacts. Sociocultural perceptions addressed distinctions between conditions and traits, definitions of "healthy," and disability and feminist critiques.
Conclusion:
Although proponents frame PES as advancing reproductive choice and potential health benefits, critics underscore unresolved scientific limitations and significant ethical and sociocultural concerns. The commercial expansion of PES warrants continued study of its validity/utility and standardized counseling.
Related Concept Videos
Genetic Screens
Forward genetic screens
Forward or “classical” genetic screens involve creating random mutations in an organism’s DNA using radiation, mutagens, or insertion of additional bases, which result in visible changes...
CRISPR
What is Genetic Engineering?
Embryonic Stem Cells
ES cells are grown in a culture medium where they can divide indefinitely, creating ES cell lines. Under certain conditions, ES cells can differentiate, either spontaneously into a variety of...
Psychosurgery
Historical Development of Psychosurgery
In the 1930s, Portuguese neurologist Antonio Egas Moniz introduced a surgical procedure designed...
Human Genetics
The complex relationship between genetics and psychology is observable through common biological components such...

