In the era of advanced reproductive medicine, in vitro fertilization (IVF) offers couples and individuals opportunities to achieve pregnancy that were unimaginable just a few decades ago. IVF involves ovarian stimulation, egg retrieval, fertilization in the laboratory, and — critically — the transfer of one or more embryos into a uterus with the intention of achieving pregnancy. But what happens when patients no longer want to pursue pregnancy but are emotionally or ethically conflicted about the disposition of their cryopreserved embryos?
This question has given rise to a controversial and emotionally charged practice known as compassionate transfer — the intentional transfer of embryos when pregnancy is not desired and is deliberately made highly unlikely to occur. Compassionate transfer raises unique clinical, ethical, legal, and psychosocial issues. Here we’ll what compassionate transfer is, why patients request it, how it is practiced, and the ethical debates it elicits among clinicians, bioethicists, and patients.
1. What Is Compassionate Transfer?
“Compassionate transfer” refers to a situation in reproductive medicine in which a patient requests that embryos — usually cryopreserved IVF embryos — be placed into her body in a manner or at a time when pregnancy is extremely unlikely and with no intention of achieving pregnancy. It can involve placing embryos in the cervix, vagina, or uterus outside a fertile window so that implantation does not occur. The procedure is intended not to create life but to offer a means of “closure” or a psychologically meaningful method of embryo disposition. ASRM+1
According to the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM), this option reflects a patient’s deeply personal values and is ethically permissible for providers to honor or decline, so long as they do so without discrimination and with appropriate informed consent. ASRM
2. Why Do Patients Request Compassionate Transfer?
Patient motivations for requesting compassionate transfer are varied and deeply personal. Some of the key themes documented in research and ethical discussions include:
2.1 Emotional and Psychological Closure
Many patients view their cryopreserved embryos as emotionally significant – sometimes as “virtual children” or potential lives — even when they no longer wish to build a family. Traditional methods of disposition — laboratory discard, donation for research or to third parties, or indefinite storage — may feel impersonal, disrespectful, or morally unsatisfactory. For these individuals, transferring embryos into their body can represent a meaningful final act: a way to return embryos “home” or allow nature to decide their fate in a way that aligns with personal beliefs about life and dignity. ASRM+1
2.2 Moral and Religious Beliefs
For some people, the thought of direct disposal of embryos — either by the clinic or scientific research — creates moral distress or conflict with their religious, spiritual, or philosophical views about when life begins. A compassionate transfer can serve as a method that they perceive as more consistent with the reverence they hold for embryonic life. ASRM
2.3 Dissatisfaction With Standard Disposition Options
Despite standard IVF consent forms offering options like research donation, third-party donation, laboratory discarding, or indefinite storage, many patients find these insufficient for their needs. Studies suggest that a notable proportion of patients (up to 20%) express interest in compassionate transfer if offered, though relatively few clinics provide it. ASRM
2.4 Psychological Benefit and Agency
Beyond moral reasoning, patients may find psychological peace in choosing their preferred method of disposition, perceiving it as an exercise of autonomy and respect for their values. Some describe it as a form of “closure” or a way to honor the emotional investment attached to embryos. Mayo Clinic
3. Clinical Practice and Variations
Compassionate transfer is rare but not unheard of. Historically, fewer than 5% of IVF clinics in the United States offered it; however, surveys of reproductive endocrinologists suggest that a higher proportion would be willing to accommodate such requests if there were professional practice guidance. ASRM+1
3.1 How It Is Performed
Clinically, compassionate transfer may involve:
- Placing embryos into the cervix or anterior fornix rather than the uterine cavity.
- Timing the procedure during a part of the menstrual cycle when endogenous hormone levels are not conducive to implantation.
- Placing embryos in the uterus when the endometrial lining is not receptive.
The goal is to position embryos in a biologically unfavorable environment for implantation. The procedure itself is similar to a typical embryo transfer but intentionally timed or located to avoid pregnancy. ASRM
3.2 Risks and Outcomes
Although compassionate transfer aims to prevent pregnancy, unintended outcomes are possible — including implantation, miscarriage, or very rarely, ectopic pregnancy. In practice surveys, a few clinicians reported such unintended outcomes. ASRM
Clinicians also cite low utility and resource concerns, given that the procedure has no intended medical benefit for achieving pregnancy. OUP Academic
3.3 Costs and Insurance
Because compassionate transfer serves non-reproductive goals, it typically is not covered by insurance. Patients are often responsible for procedure costs, raising ethical questions about access and equity. ASRM
4. Ethical Perspectives
Compassionate transfer sits at the intersection of reproductive autonomy, clinical ethics, and resource allocation. Ethicists and professional societies have articulated arguments both for and against making it available.
4.1 Supporting Compassionate Transfer
Proponents argue that respecting patient autonomy and reproductive liberty includes allowing individuals to choose how their embryos are disposed of or honored. This aligns with broader principles in medicine that respect a patient’s values and emotional well-being. ASRM
The ethical principle of beneficence — acting in a patient’s best interests — extends to psychological and emotional welfare. For some patients, having a preferred disposition method can lessen moral distress and emotional burden. ASRM
Providing compassionate transfer may also help patients resolve long-term indecision and anxiety about embryo storage, potentially preventing the indefinite freezing of embryos whose future disposition remains unresolved. ASRM
4.2 Arguments Against Compassionate Transfer
Critics argue that there is no medical benefit to compassionate transfer; it is intentionally designed to fail and therefore constitutes “futile” medical practice. This raises concerns about resource utilization, including clinic time, staff effort, and facility access that might otherwise support patients seeking fertility treatment. OUP Academic
Nonmaleficence, the principle of “do no harm,” is invoked by those arguing that unnecessary medical procedures — especially when they carry even minimal risk — should be avoided. ASRM
Some ethicists also point to distributive justice — the fair allocation of health care resources — noting that compassionate transfer benefits only a subset of patients (i.e., those with a uterus), potentially exacerbating inequities. ASRM
Another ethical challenge concerns potential self-deception: fulfilling a patient’s emotional desire for a “natural return” of embryos may inadvertently reinforce inaccurate beliefs about the likelihood of implantation or about embryo identity, rather than prompting patients to reconcile grief and moral concerns through counseling or support. ASRM
5. Clinic Policies and Informed Consent
Given the complexities involved, major reproductive medicine societies encourage clinics to develop explicit written policies regarding compassionate transfer. Such policies should:
- Define the circumstances under which compassionate transfer may be offered or declined.
- Outline thorough informed consent procedures, including a clear discussion of risks, alternatives, and the real likelihood of no pregnancy outcome.
- Clarify costs and responsibility for payment.
- Address legal considerations, including documentation and reporting requirements.
- Ensure nondiscriminatory practices. ASRM
In forming policies, clinics are urged to balance respect for patient autonomy with their own ethical principles and clinical judgment. Policies also serve to communicate clearly to patients what options are or are not available, reducing confusion or distress. ASRM
6. Broader Context: Embryo Disposition Challenges
Compassionate transfer arises from a broader challenge in reproductive medicine: deciding what to do with surplus embryos. Advances in IVF have made cryopreservation routine, and a significant proportion of embryos created are never used for pregnancy attempts. Studies suggest that up to 40% of cryopreserved embryos remain unused and stored long-term, leading to complex emotional and ethical dilemmas for patients. ASRM
Traditional disposition options — donation, destruction, indefinite storage — don’t fully capture the emotional landscape of all patients. Some find donation to research laudable but insufficiently personal; others reject donation outright; still others prefer not to bear the emotional burden of discarding embryos they associate with potential life. Compassionate transfer represents one of the emerging, patient-driven responses to these real but often under-addressed needs. ASRM
7. Conclusion
Compassionate transfer — the transfer of embryos with no intent of pregnancy — exemplifies how reproductive technologies have outpaced conventional ethical frameworks. While rare, compassionate transfer highlights profound questions about autonomy, meaning, and the emotional dimensions of fertility care.
Clinicians, patients, ethicists, and policy makers must grapple with the reality that reproductive decisions extend beyond biological outcomes. For some, compassionate transfer offers solace and dignity in parting with embryos; for others, it embodies unnecessary medical intervention and misuse of resources. Balancing respect for patient values with clinical integrity and fair resource allocation requires clear policies, sensitive counseling, and ongoing interdisciplinary dialogue.
As reproductive technology continues to evolve, so too will the ethical considerations surrounding its use — including how best to honor the profound and sometimes conflicted meanings individuals attach to the beginnings of life. Compassionate transfer may remain a niche practice, but its existence sheds light on the multifaceted tapestry of human experiences at the heart of reproductive medicine.
Modern Fertility Law has made this content available to the general public for informational purposes only. The information on this site is not intended to convey legal opinions or legal advice.