Embryo Mix-ups Stun Parents in La., Ohio

(CBS/ AP)  A suburban New Orleans hospital has suspended operations at its in-vitro fertilization center due to concerns that dozens of frozen embryos were mislabeled.

Ochsner Health System spokeswoman Amiee Goforth said Friday that hospital officials have no reason to suspect embryos were implanted in the wrong mother.

But the hospital is contacting around 100 couples that may have been affected by the apparent labeling mix-up at the Elmwood-based in-vitro fertilization center.

According to Ochsner officials, the problem occurred at the point in the IVF process when embryos that are to be stored for later use are placed in freezers filled with liquid nitrogen, reports CBS News correspondent Mark Strassmann. They are supposed to be bar coded, color coded, and labeled so nothing can go wrong.

"There are embryos that appear to be mislabeled or others cannot be accounted for," said Chief Medical Officer Joseph Bisordi.

Ochsner admits some of the patients they talked to have requested genetic testing to be sure. Doctors say that will be done at Ochsner's expense.

Today's news comes on the heels of another remarkable mistake at a fertility clinic, Strassmann notes. In Ohio, Carolyn Savage revealed that she was implanted with an embryo belonging to another couple. She plans on giving the baby over to the biological parents.

"You just can't believe you're in a situation where this is unfolding the way it is, it's unreal," Savage said.

The 40-year-old woman from the Toledo suburb of Sylvania is due to give birth within the next two weeks. The couple say they will give the baby boy over to his biological parents, who live in Michigan.

In Louisiana, Ochsner's chief executive officer, Dr. Pat Quinlan, said in a statement that the center will not be accepting new patients while the center conducts an internal audit of the program.

Other than DNA tests, all Ochsner can offer their patients is an apology, Strassmann reports.

"We are disappointed in ourselves and what we have learned today and we are deeply sorry," Quinlan said.

[erasmus111]

by tmittelstaed September 26, 2009 2:36 AM EDT
Frankly, with your attitude I sure hope you don't have kids because it's apparent you regard a baby that is not from your genes as a nuisance.


Frankly, you're an idiot. I do have kids and it was a great experience. And it wouldn't matter to me whether the baby had my genes or not. All I was saying is that if a woman is having great problems having a child, has to go through agony to be able to have one, FINALLY gets pregnant at 40 years old, knowing that it could very well be a one time thing, great chances it could be born with defects, it would be DEVESTATING to find out it wasn't yours and having to try all over again, if that was even possible.

If a woman is desperate to have a child, I doubt that just having the experience of giving birth is going to fill the void. Get a grip!

[erasmus111]

"...because it's apparent you regard a baby that is not from your genes as a nuisance."



And I REALLY dislike it when people put words in my mouth that I DIDN'T say. SCREW OFF!

[taxchurches]

That is where this narcissistic, mindless baby fetish gets us. If you can't have kids, don't have kids. How pathetic if your life is defined by whether or not you spawn more worthless humanity.

[jschamberlin]

With all due respect, a comment like this is totally out-of-line. I have an aunt that is almost perfectly capable of having children - the only thing stopping her at this point is scar tissue on her ovarian tubes due to a childhood illness that was not her fault. Otherwise, her eggs and uterus are just fine, and she would be a wonderful mother AND is preparing to marry a man that would be a wonderful father.

Learning that you cannot have kids because of issues that are out of a person's control is something that is very difficult for the entire family emotionally. Some people accept that fact, while others choose to accept the risks involved with in-vitro. I would recommend that before you start judging people, you place yourself in their shoes and try to imagine the pain and hope that is involved.

[Hosheen]

Considering that overpopulation is the biggest problem facing the world today, this kind of thing is socially irresponsible and should not be permitted. Any "fertility enhancement" is damaging to the environment and eventually to everyone.

[stuart-johns]

It's all a conspiracy!! OMG!!! There trying to clone Obama now!!!!

[Hosheen]

Why is you ignorant neo-cons try to make an anti-Obama issue out of everything? There are really important issues with the administration and you morons destroy your credibility with idiotic comments like that.

[stuart-johns]

It was a joke. Do you know what a joke is? Can you say sarcasm? And learn to construct a proper sentence. Quit talking like a three year old.

[erasmus111]

"The 40-year-old woman from the Toledo suburb of Sylvania is due to give birth within the next two weeks. The couple say they will give the baby boy over to his biological parents, who live in Michigan."


If I was this woman, I would be more than a little upset. I'd be suing! The mix-up is one thing but the fact that she is 40 years old and went through a pregnancy with a child that wasn't hers isn't good. That means that she will have to try again. SHE'S 40 YEARS OLD! Most woman at 40 are not wanting to have a child. The chances of the child having problems, like "Downs Syndrome" are good. Also, she shouldn't be getting pregnant again right away. So that means even more time passing by.

[tmittelstaed]

It's quite possible the 40 year old woman does not have viable embryos and is using donor embryos plus her husbands sperm. This would greatly reduce the chance of downs on her next try.

The fact is, though, that the surrogate mother is going to forever have a tie to the baby, and the genetic parents are also forever going to have a tie to the mother. It's perfectly possible that the genetic parents fertilized embryo would have not taken hold in the genetic mother, and that a surrogate would have been the only way for them to have a baby. Also, it's possible that this may be the only baby that the 40 year old woman may ever have - and having the experience of having a baby even though it wasn't hers and she knows she isn't going to keep it is still worthwhile.

Some of the happiest times in life are when a baby comes, and it doesn't matter if your going to keep it, or give it away, or if it was yours or not - you are giving life to a child who would otherwise not have ever lived - and even if the child leaves your life and is raised by another couple, you will know that you, and nobody else, gave it life. Frankly, with your attitude I sure hope you don't have kids because it's apparent you regard a baby that is not from your genes as a nuisance.

[curse914]

A women having a child over 40 is asking for downs syndrome.

[jsf14]

There are probably people who feel they cannot be good parents to a child whose genes they didn't provide. Legally then, are the couple to whom the child is born responsible for raising that child? I've heard of more cases where both the birth parents and the genetic parents want the kid. But suppose the birth parents don't want the baby any more and the genetic parents won't or can't take him/her?

[tom_gwynn]

Speaking as one who has gone through the process, let me assure you that IVF is not fun, particularly for the mother-to-be. It's expensive, there are a lot of tests, a lot of shots, and it's an emotional roller-coaster with (all too often) heartache and disappointment at the end if the implant doesn't take. You don't go through all this unless you really, *really* want a child. I cannot imagine anyone who's gone through this ever "not wanting" the child they've worked so hard to have, whether its their genetic child or not. The love and wonder of raising a child have nothing to do with whose genetics the child carries.