Now Accepting Apple Pay

Apple Pay is the easiest and most secure way to pay on StudyMoose in Safari.

Nadya Suleman’s Dilemma

Dr. Michael Kamrava is the fertility doctor who treated Nadya Suleman. A disciplinary complaint of “gross negligence” has been charged against Dr. Kamrava, by the California Medical Board, stating Dr. Kamrava acted “beyond reasonable judgment by helping Nadya Suleman conceive octuplets” and implanted Suleman with a number of embryos “far in excess of the (American Society of Reproductive Medicine) recommendation and beyond the reasonable judgment of any treating physician” (lawprofessors., 2010).

Criticism of Dr.Kamrava’s West Coast IVF Clinic

Dr. Kamrava said that, “after warning her of the risks associated with a multiple birth, he’d done as she asked” (Johnston, Josephine, 2009). Dr. Kamrava stated that Nadya Suleman insisted on the treatment she received and the transfer of all six remaining frozen embryos. It was her choice. Since medical records are confidential, the public will never know how many embryos were transferred, and what actually occurred, with this situation. (Wikipedia, 2010).

Since the octuplets were born, Dr.Kamrava’s West Coast IVF Clinic in Beverly Hills has received overwhelming criticism for their treatment, because American Society of Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) guidelines state “a woman Suleman’s age should have no more than two embryos implanted” (lawprofessors.

Get quality help now
Prof. Finch
Verified writer

Proficient in: Ethics

4.7 (346)

“ This writer never make an mistake for me always deliver long before due date. Am telling you man this writer is absolutely the best. ”

+84 relevant experts are online
Hire writer

typepad. com, 2010). “Dr. Michael Kamrava was expelled from the American Society for Reproductive Medicine in October 2009” (Wikipedia, 2010). “A hearing date has not yet been set for the Medical Board complaint, which could see Kamrava’s license revoked or suspended” (lawprofessors. typepad. com, 2010).

Bioethical Criticism of Nadya Suleman’s Dilemma

The Suleman case opens other ethical questions that have not been considered, by fertility experts.

Get to Know The Price Estimate For Your Paper
Number of pages
Email Invalid email

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy. We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

"You must agree to out terms of services and privacy policy"
Check writers' offers

You won’t be charged yet!

Doctors are now seeing serious drawbacks and requirements for more stringent rules, where guidelines were never defined. (Gerdes, Louise, 2010). There are numerous bioethical considerations that must now be considered, in the treatment of fertility, through vitro fertilization. Nadya Suleman’s case has brought the issue to the forefront as never before. The issues are understandable, and can be listed as follows:

The most important issue in reproductive technology is the preventative risk to both the mother and babies. The unnatural act of fertilization puts the women at risk of carrying unnatural numbers of fetus, leading to “anemia, blood clots, hypertension, and labor complications” that must be carefully considered. Other issues to consider, when there are cases of multiple babies, include “seizures, jaundice, heart problems, lung problems, blindness, and development delays” (Gerdes, Louise, 2010). Customer seeking repeated fertility treatments should be referred to a mental health professional, for consultation.(lawprofessors. typepad. com, 2010).

Fertility industry guidelines

Future regulations must developed fertility industry guidelines that may or may not include government regulations. Some ethicists admit the growth of infertility field is a high-profit industry and poorly monitored; it is a huge problem. (Gerdes, Louise, 2010). Extensive consideration should be given to the parent/s considering fertility procedures, to ensure their financial stability, both emotionally and economically. This should not become an economic issue, where the government eventually pays for the children, in times of economic stress.

Designations need to be made who will pay for the hospital bills. (Gerdes, Louise, 2010). Who has the disposition authority of embryos needs to be more clearly defined. This is still a hot issue, with bioethics. (Johnston, Josephine, 2009). Finally, what is the physician’s responsibility, both legally, and morally? At what point should the physician refuse to perform what the patient demands? There is clearly information that shows Nadya’s physician should have turned her down, rather than comply to her requests. (Johnston, Josephine, 2009).

Cite this page

Nadya Suleman’s Dilemma. (2020, Jun 02). Retrieved from

👋 Hi! I’m your smart assistant Amy!

Don’t know where to start? Type your requirements and I’ll connect you to an academic expert within 3 minutes.

get help with your assignment