The illusion of reproductive choice: how restorative reproductive medicine violates reproductive autonomy and informed consent

RRM Academy response · 15 October 2026

Asking RRM clinicians to disclose, Eve C. Feinberg declared nothing to disclose after $99,866.17 from industry

Three authors write in Fertility and Sterility that clinicians who practice restorative reproductive medicine (RRM) have an ethical obligation to "disclose any moral objections to IVF that may influence their clinical recommendations." Their senior author, Eve C. Feinberg, declared "nothing to disclose" after industry payments in the 36 months before submission, nearly all of them from Ferring, maker of the IVF drug Menopur. The authors repeated that declaration in 2026, after another Ferring consulting fee, this one naming Menopur.

1. 01Ferring paid the senior author who called for transparency

   The essay's closing paragraph states: "Healthcare providers engaged in RRM have an ethical obligation to be transparent about their qualifications to practice in the field of reproductive medicine and to disclose any moral objections to IVF that may influence their clinical recommendations." Its Declaration of Interests reads: "B.J.P. has nothing to disclose. J.T.K. has nothing to disclose. E.C.F. has nothing to disclose." The ICMJE disclosure standard covers relationships in the 36 months before submission with entities that have an interest in the work (ICMJE standard).

   Eve C. Feinberg, the senior author, is an IVF doctor at Northwestern University. She is listed on ASRM's Fertility and Sterility page as one of the journal's Editorial Editors. CMS Open Payments lists 35 records for her from July 16, 2022, to July 16, 2025, the 36 months before the journal received the essay. They total $99,866.17, and Ferring, maker of the IVF stimulation drug Menopur, accounts for $99,502.20 (Open Payments profile).

   By type, the payments were consulting fees of $68,641.79, travel and lodging of $25,278.89, speaking and faculty compensation of $4,611.00, food and beverage of $1,323.17, and education of $11.32. They include a $4,850.00 consulting fee from Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc. on February 14, 2025, five months before submission. Open Payments lists a second $4,850.00 Ferring consulting fee on September 10, 2025, with Menopur as the product, 15 days after the essay went online.

   Open Payments lists $1,829.45 to first author Benjamin J. Peipert from Ferring and EMD Serono between October 2022 and August 2023, for meals and Ferring travel (Open Payments profile).

2. 02The authors repeated the declaration in 2026

   Fertility and Sterility published responses to the essay, including one from Stanford and colleagues (Stanford et al. 2026). The authors' replies to Stanford et al. and to Frank-Herrmann et al. appeared in January 2026.

   In both replies, the authors again declared that they have nothing to disclose (Reply to Stanford et al.) (Reply to Frank-Herrmann et al.). The journal received the replies on October 10 and October 20, 2025, after both $4,850.00 Ferring consulting fees.

3. 03The essay argues against RRM without a study

   The essay reports no data of its own. Its five references are a RESOLVE web page on insurance coverage by state, a Newsweek opinion piece, the Saint Paul VI Institute's "about" page, an ACOG issue brief on RRM and the SART "Predict your IVF success" calculator. None is a study.

   The essay states: "Studies claiming that RRM is as effective or more effective than IVF frequently omit an appropriate comparator group and lack peer review." The sentence carries no citation, and the authors name none of the studies it describes. A 2008 NaProTechnology study from an Irish general practice appeared in the Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine (Stanford et al. 2008). A 2012 NaProTechnology study from a Canadian family practice appeared in Canadian Family Physician (Tham et al. 2012).

   Two more claims carry no citation. The essay states: "In most cases, reproductive function cannot be restored." It also says "patients may be advised that 24 months are needed to complete an adequate trial of therapy and achieve a live birth," and calls this "an excessive amount of time to dedicate to a potentially ineffective treatment approach."

   A 2025 NaProTechnology study of 1,310 couples, published after the essay, reported an adjusted cumulative take-home baby rate of 62.1% (95% CI 58.8 to 65.4) and a median time to conception of 7.1 months (Sánchez-Méndez et al. 2025).