For eight years, Shannon Petersen and her husband struggled to conceive. In 2022, they turned to in vitro fertilization (IVF), hoping it would finally bring them a child. Their doctor recommended preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A), a widely used screening tool advertised as nearly 100% accurate in identifying viable embryos. With high hopes, they agreed to the costly, insurance-excluded test.
But their excitement turned to devastation. The test labeled all five of their embryos as “abnormal,” and their clinic refused to transfer them. Determined, the Petersens took out a $15,000 loan for another IVF cycle, yielding just one embryo. This time, they opted not to test. The attempt failed, leaving them to consider adoption—until Petersen stumbled upon research challenging PGT-A’s accuracy.
The PGT-A Debate: Promise vs. Reality
PGT-A screens embryos before transfer, aiming to select those most likely to result in a healthy pregnancy. But its reliability has been questioned. The American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) states that its universal benefit remains unproven.
Seeking answers, Petersen joined a Stanford University clinical trial examining whether so-called “abnormal” embryos could result in healthy births. In a surprising turn, one of her previously discarded embryos—marked as having a serious chromosomal abnormality—resulted in a successful pregnancy. She gave birth to a healthy baby boy in November 2024.
Legal Battles and Ethical Concerns
Petersen’s story is not unique. Nearly 700 IVF patients have filed class-action lawsuits against major PGT-A providers, including CooperSurgical, Natera, and Reproductive Genetic Innovations. The lawsuits claim these companies misrepresented PGT-A’s accuracy, leading families to discard potentially viable embryos. While some companies deny wrongdoing, critics argue the IVF industry’s minimal oversight allows commercial interests to outpace regulation.
What’s Next for IVF Patients?
Despite these concerns, many fertility specialists still advocate for PGT-A, citing its ability to reduce miscarriages and failed transfers. However, emerging research suggests that some embryos labeled “abnormal” can self-correct, leading to healthy births. Experts like Dr. Norbert Gleicher warn that the test may be unnecessarily eliminating viable embryos, calling it “harmful to a lot of patients.”
For couples navigating IVF, these revelations add another layer of complexity. Should they trust PGT-A, or take the risk of transferring embryos deemed non-viable? As lawsuits unfold and research continues, one thing is clear: the future of PGT-A—and how it’s used in fertility care—may be about to change.