Ethics and Policy · Reproductive Ethics

Response to “The illusion of reproductive choice: how restorative reproductive medicine violates reproductive autonomy and informed consent”

Stanford JB, Parnell TA, Minjeur M

Fertility and sterility, 125(1), 177, 2026
DOI 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2025.10.014 PMID 41475698

In response to The illusion of reproductive choice: how restorative reproductive medicine violates reproductive autonomy and informed consent. (Peipert BJ et al., 2025)

Abstract

Peipert et al. (1) claim that restorative reproductive medicine (RRM) originated as a political and religious movement with the purpose to limit access to in vitro fertilization (IVF). In so doing, they mischaracterize the origin, development, and aims of RRM, as articulated by the International Institute for Restorative Reproductive Medicine, founded in 2000. They do not refer to any peer-reviewed medical literature published by clinicians and researchers working to develop RRM. Objecting that certain political or economic interests promote RRM (or, alternatively, IVF) does not constitute the basis for an evidence-based scientific critique or discussion. Thus, their editorial falls short of a serious effort to understand RRM scientifically.

Responses

Topics

By this author

Related research

Ethics and Policy › Reproductive Ethics › Conscience Protections
Joseph B Stanford, Tracey A Parnell, Monica Minjeur
Joe Stanford, Joey Stanford, J Stanford, T Parnell, M Minjeur
PMID 41475698 41475698 DOI 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2025.10.014 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2025.10.014 Stanford et al. 2026, Stanford 2026