Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Baby’s sperm cells frozen for future fatherhood (Adult Stem Cells)
Times of London ^ | June 21, 2009 | Sarah-Kate Templeton

Posted on 06/20/2009 2:39:40 PM PDT by GOPGuide

DOCTORS have frozen sperm stem cells from a three-month-old baby so that he can father children when he is older.

The infant is undergoing cancer treatment that is likely to leave him infertile. His parents hope that once he reaches adulthood, doctors will transplant the stem cells back to allow him to produce sperm.

The breakthrough in America could give the infant the chance to have a family, but raises ethical questions because a baby is unable to give consent to such a procedure.

Until now, doctors in Britain and America have offered fertility treatment to boys only once they reach puberty, when they are first able to provide a sperm sample which is frozen for later use.

However, doctors now believe they can act much earlier by removing the stem cells which make sperm. The cells are present in babies from birth, but are relatively few in number so scientists are developing techniques to encourage the cells to multiply in the laboratory.

They plan to transplant the cells back into the boys when they reach adulthood or even stimulate the cells to develop into sperm in the laboratory, allowing patients to go through routine IVF treatment later.

Doctors at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, have offered the treatment to the parents of young boys who are likely to be left infertile from radiotherapy and chemotherapy.

The parents have been advised that the treatment is still at an experimental stage and there are no guarantees of success.

snip

“We do not approach the families of every little boy – only if we’re fairly certain the [cancer] treatment is going to leave them infertile. We’re hopeful because science advances so quickly, but we can’t make any promises. It’s just an option that’s never been available before.”

(Excerpt) Read more at timesonline.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: ivf; science; stemcell; stemcells

1 posted on 06/20/2009 2:39:41 PM PDT by GOPGuide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: GOPGuide

3 mos old & has cancer—now that is very sad. God bless that child.


2 posted on 06/20/2009 2:41:50 PM PDT by lilylangtree (Veni, Vidi, Vici)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOPGuide

Someone who’d leave a young man crippled and unable to have children due to a question of his not having been able to give consent as an infant is one cruel b*$+t*rd.


3 posted on 06/20/2009 2:43:11 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOPGuide; xsmommy; Buckhead
Just when I thought I'd never see an application the "Precocious Toddler" aspect of the Rule Against Perpetuities.
4 posted on 06/20/2009 2:52:02 PM PDT by martin_fierro (< |:)~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOPGuide
raises ethical questions because a baby is unable to give consent to such a procedure.

WTF??? The baby is unable to consent to ANY of the procedures being performed on him, including every blood draw, every medication put into him, every X-ray/CT/MRI, etc. Babies can't consent, period. It's up the adults to make assumptions about what he'll be glad later on that they did. Who knows, maybe he'd prefer to die of cancer before his first birthday? That's about as likely as he is to not want to have the OPTION of producing his own biological offspring when he grows up. It's not like they're forcing him to reproduce -- they're just doing the best thing available under current technology to ensure that he can do so IF AND WHEN HE CHOOSES. There is no downside to this procedure -- it's not like it leaves the kid with deformed genitals or lacking any testosterone-production capacity that he would otherwise have had:

Ginsberg added that taking biopsies from the testicles, which contain the sperm stem cells, does not cause any harm to the infants.

Frankly, I think this probably ought to be mandatory for boys and girls undergoing fertility-destroying medical treatments. The basic concept (cryopreservation and subsequent reimplantation of a portion of gonadal tissue) has already been successfully applied with young women. It's a lot more rational to raise the ethical issue that a child can't consent to undergoing fertility-destroying treatment *without* reasonable measures being taken to preserve fertility.

5 posted on 06/20/2009 3:16:07 PM PDT by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOPGuide
The breakthrough in America could give the infant the chance to have a family, but raises ethical questions because a baby is unable to give consent to such a procedure.

Oh, come on. 3 months earlier they could've stuck a knife in his skull and sucked his brain out without consent.

I swear, the level of idiocy in this country just astonishes anyone who is capable of rational thought.

6 posted on 06/20/2009 3:23:06 PM PDT by john in springfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker
The basic concept (cryopreservation and subsequent reimplantation of a portion of gonadal tissue) has already been successfully applied with young women.

I agree with you.

7 posted on 06/20/2009 3:42:15 PM PDT by GOPGuide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

“...due to a question of his not having been able to give consent as an infant is one cruel b*$+t*rd.”

Not to mention just plain stupid. Childern HAVE parents to make such decisions FOR THEM. That is a main part of the job description.


8 posted on 06/20/2009 5:22:51 PM PDT by TalBlack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson