The journey of infertility is emotional and our regulatory system in Ontario makes it worse. This industry鈥檚 growth has outpaced the development of fitting legislative action.
Ontario is exercising a laissez-faire approach in regard to fertility clinics with very limited oversight on their operations. They鈥檙e essentially being treated as private businesses rather than health care providers. Consequently, clinics are operating in a regulatory blind-spot starting from when they obtain patient consent, through the handling and storage of genetic material and extending beyond.
This is causing tangible harm. Consider the notorious Barwin case, where an Ontario fertility doctor intentionally inseminated women with the wrong sperm, including his own. The class action involved over 200 plaintiffs and settled for $13.3 million, a sum not paid by Barwin but rather by the (CMPA). The CMPA is funded by doctors, then doctors are reimbursed by the province. Essentially, Ontario taxpayers end up paying for Barwin’s actions.
Let鈥檚 go back to the beginning. The was Canada’s first attempt at regulating fertility treatments, but it lost its effect when multiple sections were declared unconstitutional, thereby transferring the duty of regulation to provinces. Ontario, a province at the forefront of fertility medicine, is seriously lacking comprehensive regulatory control.
The conversation gets interesting when discussing private fertility clinics as they operate in this regulatory void. They often escape rigorous scrutiny, subject only to a program that audits procedures using anesthesia. Thus, treatments not involving anesthesia face even less regulation.
Truthfully, the industry has been commercialized. Private clinics have the freedom to slap on hefty price tags on procedures. A single IVF cycle will cost between $9,000 to $15,000 and the medication required will range between $5,000 and $15,000.
Fertility clinics have now standardized “add-on” procedures, such as (ICSI), adding approximately $3,000 to the treatment. ICSI’s efficacy and necessity are not nearly as well studied as they should be, yet it’s frequently recommended, thereby raising costs without guaranteed improvement in outcomes. OHIP covers one cycle of IVF; however, generally, one cycle is not enough and the wait-list to get coverage is incredibly long.
Additionally, in order to receive informed consent, doctors must disclose to patients the risks, benefits, and alternatives associated with any treatment. But how can fertility doctors obtain true informed consent for procedures like ICSI when doctors themselves lack comprehensive knowledge of the risks and benefits, given the procedure is not well studied? The drive for profit has obscured the transparency necessary for genuine informed consent.
The repercussions of these regulatory shortcomings aren鈥檛 just about money; the emotional and mental toll on patients when treatments fail can be brutal. Even more so when these issues could have been prevented or stem from unethical practices.
To illustrate, I recently worked on a case where clients informed my superior that the fertility clinic they had been patients at had simply lost their embryos. As we spoke about the potential legal avenues to pursue, we asked ourselves, 鈥渉ow do we even begin legal proceedings for this issue? Maybe breach of bailment?鈥 It鈥檚 difficult because we鈥檙e not talking about a car left in valet service, we鈥檙e talking about genetic material stored in a medical clinic.
To join the conversation set a first and last name in your user profile.
Sign in or register for free to join the Conversation