Transitioning from Infertility-Based (ART 1.0) to Elective (ART 2.0) Use of Assisted Reproductive Technologies and the DOHaD Hypothesis: Do We Need to Change Consenting?

The use of assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) has increased significantly in recent years. While this is partially due to improved access for infertile patients, another contribution to the growth of ART utilization is represented by individuals without infertility, who electively chose to freeze their gametes and embryos for future use, before ever attempting conception spontaneously. Overall, the safety of ART for parents and children is well described and the risks are modest. However, while long-term health consequences for offspring as postulated by the Developmental Origin of Health and Disease (DOHaD) hypothesis are unknown, numerous animal studies suggest a predisposition for chronic diseases like hypertension and glucose intolerance. In this article, we argue that a key difference exists between infertile patients, who need to use ART as the only means to achieve pregnancy, and (likely) fertile patients who elect to use ART techniques as a family planning option. We believe that these two sets of patients are different and their risks-benefit ratios are different. We propose that while all patients should be aware of the risks, patients planning to utilize ART techniques without a diagnosis of infertility should be encouraged to think critically about the additional risks, particularly the "potential" long-term risks that may be imposed from these elective procedures.