The Dilemma of Spare Embryos After IVF Success: Social Workers’ Role in Helping Clients Consider Disposition Options


  • Stephanie Boys Indiana University
  • Julie Walsh Indiana University



In vitro fertilization (IVF), assisted reproductive technology (ART), reproductive counseling, frozen embryos, embryo disposition


Social work services for persons undergoing the in vitro fertilization process
(IVF) has greatly lagged behind the medical technology opportunities provided to these clients. Advocacy for social work services for persons undergoing IVF was advanced upon the procedure’s initial development, but there has been a stark lack of recent scholarship regarding social work in fertility health services. The existing literature suggests several talking points regarding the IVF process to be discussed with persons considering IVF, especially the medical and psychological risks of failure. This article discusses a newer and necessary topic to cover in pre-IVF counseling: the possibility of too much success in the form of excess embryos. Although the topic must be covered with sensitivity to the relatively low rate of IVF success, persons receiving care through assisted reproductive
technology (ART) need to be prepared for the difficult moral questions raised when IVF procedures result in even more embryos than intended. Social workers need to be prepared to explore the pros and cons of each disposition option with IVF clients.

Author Biographies

Stephanie Boys, Indiana University

Associate Professor of Social Work

Julie Walsh, Indiana University

Doctoral Student in Social Work


Baron, N., & Bazzell, J. (2014). Assisted reproductive technologies. The Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law, 15, 57-93.

Bergart, A. M. (2000). The experience of women in unsuccessful infertility treatment: What do patients need when medical intervention fails? Social Work in Health Care, 30(4), 45-69. doi:

Black, R. B., Walther, V. N., Chute, D., & Greenfeld, D. A. (1992). When in vitro fertilization fails: A prospective view. Social Work in Health Care, 17(3), 1-19. doi:

Blyth, E. (1999). The social work role in assisted conception. British Journal of Social Work, 29(5), 727-740. doi:

Carbone, J., & Cahn, N. (2009). Embryo fundamentalism. William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal, 18, 1015-1052.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC]. (2012). Assisted reproductive technology: National summary report 2010. Retrieved from

CDC. (2017). ART success rates: Preliminary data, 2015. Retrieved from

Chochovski, J., Moss, S. A., & Charman, D. P. (2013). Recovery after unsuccessful in vitro fertilization: The complex role of resilience and marital relationships. Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics & Gynecology, 34(3), 122-128. doi:

Clark, P. A. (2014). Ethical implications of embryo adoption, pluripotent stem cell biology. In C. Atwood (Ed.), Advances in mechanisms, methods and models (pp. 213-229). doi: [Available from]

Crawshaw, M., Hunt, J., Monach, J., & Pike, S. (2013). British Infertility Counselling Association: Guidelines for good practice in infertility counselling, 2012. Human Fertility, 16(1), 73-88. doi:

Crockin, S. L., & Debele, G. A. (2014). Ethical issues in assisted reproduction: A primer for family law attorneys. Journal of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, 27, 289-357.

Daniels, K. R. (1990). Psychosocial factors for couples awaiting in vitro fertilization. Social Work in Health Care, 14(2), 81-98. doi:

Davis, M. (2014). Maryland embryo adoption: Religious entanglement in the Maryland Stem Cell Research Act of 2006. University of Pennsylvania Journal of Law & Social Change, 17, 291-327.

Ellison, D. A., & Karpin, I. (2011). Death without life: Grievability and IVF. South Atlantic Quarterly, 110(4), 795-811. doi:

Frith, L., Blyth, E., & Lui, S. (2017). Family building using embryo adoption: Relationships and contact arrangements between provider and recipient families—A mixed-methods study. Human Reproduction, 32(5), 1092-1099. doi:

Fronek, P., & Crawshaw, M. (2015). The “new family” as an emerging norm: A commentary on the position of social work in assisted reproduction. British Journal of Social Work, 45, 737-746. doi:

Gosden, R. (2011). Cryopreservation: A cold look at technology for fertility preservation. Fertility & Sterility, 96(2), 246-268. doi:

Greenfeld, D., Mazure, C., Haseltine, F., & DeCherney, A. (1985). The role of the social worker in the in-vitro fertilization program. Social Work in Health Care, 10(2), 71-79. doi:

Johnston, J., & Gusamano, M. K. (2013). Why we should all pay for fertility treatment: An argument from ethics and policy. Hastings Center Report, 43(2), 18-21. doi:

Lino, M., Kuczynski, K., Rodriguez, N., & Schap, T. (2017). Expenditures on children by families, 2015. Miscellaneous Publication No. 1528-2015. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion.

Lyon, K. W. (1999). Babies on ice: The legal status of frozen embryos involved in custody disputes during divorce. Whittier Law Review, 21, 695-735.

Kalb, C. (2010, Jan. 19). All that remains: Couples who decide not to implant embryos often face a difficult choice and limited options. Newsweek. Retrieved from

Kuwayama, M. (2007). Highly efficient vitrification for cryopreservation of human oocytes and embryos: The cryotop method. Theriogenology, 67, 73-80. doi:

Madeira, J. L. (2015). The ART of informed consent: Assessing patient perceptions, behaviors, and lived experience of IVF and embryo disposition informed consent processes. Family Law Quarterly, 49(1), 7-28.

Mastenbroek, S., Van der Veen, F., Aflatoonian, A., Shapiro, B., Bossuyt, P., & Repping, S. (2011). Embryo selection in IVF. Human Reproduction, 26(5), 964-966. doi:

Mundy, L. (2008). Everything conceivable: How assisted reproduction is changing our world. New York, NY: Anchor.

Murphy, J. B. (2013). Access to in vitro fertilization deserves increased regulation in the United States. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 39(2), 85-92. doi:

Nachtigall, R. D., Becker, G., Friese, C., Butler, A., & McDougall, K. (2005). Parents’ conceptualization of their frozen embryos complicates the disposition decision. Fertility and Sterility, 84(2), 431-434. doi:

Nachtigall, R. D., MacDougall, K., Harrington, J., Duff, J., Lee, M., & Becker, G. (2009). How couples who have undergone in vitro fertilization decide what to do with surplus frozen embryos. Fertility and Sterility, 92(6), 2094-2096. doi:

O'Brien, M. (2010). An intersection of ethics and law: The frozen embryo dilemma and the chilling choice between life and death. Whittier Law Review, 32, 171-196.

Robertson, J. A. (2014). Egg freezing and egg banking: Empowerment and alienation in assisted reproduction. Journal of Law and the Biosciences, 1(2), 113-136. doi:

Synesiou, K. (2010). The dilemma of remaining frozen embryos. Retrieved from

Tucker, C. (2014). Abandoned embryos: The dilemma of eternal storage. New Hampshire Bar Journal, Spring/Summer, 54(3), 18-23.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Population Affairs [US DHHS]. (2017). Embryo adoption. Retrieved from

Walther, V. N. (1991). Emerging roles of social work in perinatal services. Social Work in Health Care, 15(2), 35-48. doi:

Whittingham, D. G., Leibo, S., & Mazur, P. (1972). Survival of mouse embryos frozen to 196 degrees C. and 269 degrees C. Science, 178(4059), 411-414. doi: