Artificial Placenta - Imminent Ethical Considerations for Research Trials and Clinical Translation

Value sensitive design and the artificial placenta

Artificial placenta technologies (also termed 'artificial wombs') for use in place of conventional neonatal intensive care are increasingly closer to first-in-human use. There is growing ethical interest in partial ectogestation (the use of an artificial placenta to continue gestation of an underdeveloped human entity extra uterum), however, there has been little reflection on the ethical issues in the design of the technology. While some have noted the importance of such reflection, and others have noted that a 'value sensitive design' approach should be preferred, they have not elaborated on what this means. In this article, we consider what a value sensitive design approach to artificial placenta design might encompass. We believe that applying this framework to the topic at hand raises theoretical and substantive ethical questions that merit further elucidation. Highlighting that there is a careful need to separate preferences from values and that our intervention should be considered only a starting point, we explore some of the values that could be used to make ethical design choices about the artificial placenta: efficacy, compassion and accessibility.

Artificial placentas, pregnancy loss and loss-sensitive care

In this paper, we explore how the prospect of artificial placenta technology (nearing clinical trials in human subjects) should encourage further consideration of the loss experienced by individuals when their pregnancy ends unexpectedly. Discussions of pregnancy loss are intertwined with procreative loss, whereby the gestated entity has died when the pregnancy ends. However, we demonstrate how pregnancy loss can and does exist separate to procreative loss in circumstances where the gestated entity survives the premature ending of the pregnancy. In outlining the value that can be attached to pregnancy beyond fetal-centric narratives, we illustrate how pregnancy loss, separate to procreative loss, can be experienced. This loss has already been recognised among parents who have experienced an unexpected early ending of their pregnancy, resulting in their child being cared for in neonatal intensive care unit. Artificial placentas, however, may exacerbate these feelings and make pregnancy loss (without procreative loss) more visible. We argue that pregnancy is an embodied state in which gestation is facilitated by the body but gestation itself should be recognised as a process-and one that could be separable from pregnancy. In demarcating the two, we explore the different ways in which pregnancy loss can be understood. Our objective in this paper goes beyond contributing to our philosophical understanding of pregnancy towards practical-orientated conclusions regarding the care pathways surrounding the artificial placenta. We make recommendations including the need for counselling and careful consideration of the language used when an artificial placenta is used.

Ethical reflections on organizing the first human trial of artificial womb technologies

OBJECTIVE

To investigate how to protect participants in the artificial womb technology (AWT) human trials.

METHOD

We compared randomized controlled trials and single arm trials to understand which trial design best balances the interests of science and participants. We also compared AWT trials with comparable settings to understand how to protect participants.

RESULTS

Randomized trials might fail in reaching a sizeable sample, which could pointlessly expose participants to risks. Furthermore, parents who choose to participate in the trial might expect to receive AWT. Failed expectations might distress parents and hinder the therapeutic relationship. The trial is divided into two steps. First, delivery into AWT involves two participants: the mother and the fetus. As AWT requires a C-section, the procedure cannot be carried out without the mother's consent regardless of fetal benefit. Treatment in AWT, involves one participant: the infant. As for any other invasive intervention, the AWT trial should be suspended if harmful.

CONCLUSIONS

A single arm trial could prevent some of the methodological and ethical challenges of the randomized trials. Moreover, better decisional tools should be developed to help parents decide whether to participate in the AWT trial. For example, using visual aids or showing the AWT.