As fertility science pushes toward lab-created gametes, gene editing and new paths to parenthood, experts warn the legal, ethical and healthcare systems surrounding reproduction are already struggling to keep pace.
NEW YORK, NEW YORK (October 8, 2026)– Converging from Florida, Pennsylvania, France and NYC, the leading experts in reproductive medicine, fertility law, bioethics, femtech and IVF litigation gathered Tuesday morning at the New York Academy of Sciences for The Future of Fertility, a cross-disciplinary forum examining how rapidly advancing reproductive science is reshaping the legal, ethical and human systems surrounding fertility care.
Femtech executives, reproductive endocrinologists, attorneys, clinicians and other fertility-industry professionals attended for a unique opportunity to hear recognized authorities across disciplines tackle some of the most consequential questions shaping the future of fertility.
The goal was to pull back the curtain on where fertility is actually headed, not simply by looking at the next scientific breakthrough, but by examining what happens when innovation moves faster than the laws, ethical frameworks, healthcare systems and professionals expected to support it.
Convened by Rader Law Group’s IVF Law Group division and moderated by journalist and bioethicist Elizabeth Yuko, PhD, the forum brought together five nationally recognized voices whose work rarely occupies the same stage. Several of the questions they raised are no longer theoretical.
Can an embryo outlive a patient’s legal rights?
Andrew Rader, Esq., Board-Certified Civil Trial Attorney, founder of IVF Law Group and a leading authority on IVF litigation, focused on the collision between modern reproductive medicine and laws written decades before today’s technology existed. Some medical malpractice statutes still being applied today predate the first reported human pregnancy from a frozen embryo in 1983. Yet embryos can now remain frozen for decades.
Rader put the conflict this way: “What happens when science can preserve the subject of medical error for longer than the law preserves the patient’s remedy?”
He also raised a growing legal problem involving proof of chain-of-custody as embryos move among clinics, storage facilities and couriers. In one recent case he discussed, embryos were transported from Louisiana to Texas; years later, when a device was thawed, no embryo was recovered, and the evidence could not establish where, when or in whose possession it disappeared. The case illustrates a larger legal problem: how do you determine responsibility when the evidence cannot establish where the loss occurred?
What if eggs and sperm no longer have to come from eggs and sperm?
- Glenn Cohen, Professor at Harvard Law School, Faculty Director of the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, and global authority on bioethics, health law and medical AI, explored in-vitro
gametogenesis, or IVG, a developing technology aimed at creating reproductive cells from other adult cells, with implications that extend far beyond conventional infertility treatment.
IVG could potentially restore reproductive capacity after cancer treatment or premature menopause, extend reproductive capacity later in life and one day allow same-sex couples to each have a genetic connection to the same child. Cohen also outlined more disruptive possibilities: creating hundreds or thousands of embryos for genetic sequencing and ranking; pairing selection with gene editing; “solo IVG,” in which one person supplies both gametes; and “multiplex parenting,” involving multiple genetic contributors within a single generation.
His discussion also touched on heritable human genome editing, equality and access, and uterus transplantation, including the provocative question of whether there is a “right to experience pregnancy.” The science may begin in a laboratory, but the consequences quickly become questions about parenthood, access, ethics, regulation and public policy.
Can fertility medicine keep innovating if the workforce cannot keep up?
Shelley Gautam, RN, fertility-care, femtech and digital-health strategist and Clinical Advisory Board Member at Fertilia AI, shifted the focus to the clinicians expected to implement innovation. Her presentation, “The Human Cost of Innovation,” asked what happens when fertility organizations invest in new tools faster than they invest in the people responsible for delivering them.
“Innovation doesn’t implement itself,” Gautam told attendees. She cited a 2026 survey in which 64% of reproductive endocrinology and infertility providers reported concern about the ongoing shortage of specialists, along with research pointing to burnout, low well-being and weak workplace engagement among fertility nurses. Her challenge to the industry: innovation cannot scale without a workforce built to sustain it.
Who controls an embryo when the people who created it no longer agree?
Elizabeth Vaysman, Esq., senior family-formation attorney in adoption, surrogacy and fertility law with Foster + Bloom Family Formation Law Group, focused on embryo disposition and the state-by-state legal patchwork governing assisted reproduction. The legal fate of embryos can depend not only on what the parties intended, but also on where a dispute arises and which legal approach a court applies.
Some courts emphasize agreements signed before a dispute arose. Others balance the competing interests of the parties. Another approach requires contemporaneous mutual consent, meaning embryos cannot be used, donated or destroyed unless both parties agree at the time the decision is being made. The cases force increasingly urgent questions: How much weight should an agreement signed years earlier carry? What happens when one person wants to use an embryo and the other does not?
What can reproductive medicine make possible when infertility, cancer or disease threatens the chance to build a family?
David Sable, MD, Board-Certified Reproductive Endocrinologist and fertility-technology pioneer, opened the program with the scientific and historical perspective of someone whose career has spanned the evolution of modern reproductive medicine. He focused primarily on the history of IVF and the remarkable pace at which the technology continues to advance. He emphasized that, for so many people, the desire to have children and build a family is a deeply rooted human need, yet approximately one in six people experience infertility.
Dr. Sable illustrated this with a particularly powerful story about a patient who had just been diagnosed with cancer. The first two questions the patient asked were: “What is the treatment?” and “Will I still be able to have children?” That moment underscored just how profound the desire to have children and continue one’s family can be, even when someone is confronting a life-threatening diagnosis.
He explained that the continuing advances in IVF and reproductive medicine are increasingly giving hope and options to people who might otherwise be unable to have children, whether because of infertility, cancer, or other diseases and medical treatments that can compromise fertility. As the science and technology continue to progress, the ability to preserve fertility and help more people build families continues to expand.
In closing, Dr. Yuko said: “Innovation does not happen in isolation. Every advance creates new opportunities, new responsibilities and, sometimes, entirely new questions that none of these fields can answer on their own.” The science is moving. The question is whether the systems surrounding it can move with it.
The conversation continued after the formal program, with attendees and panelists gathering for networking and further discussion. For those unable to have attended in person, the program will be made available after October 14, 2026 at IVFlawgroup.com. The next expert forum is being planned to take place in Washington D.C., in early 2027, with details to be announced.
