Image by Elena Έλενα Kontogianni Κοντογιάννη from Pixabay
Image by Elena Έλενα Kontogianni Κοντογιάννη from Pixabay

EXPERT REACTION: Second IVF mix-up at Monash IVF

Embargoed until: Publicly released:
Not peer-reviewed: This work has not been scrutinised by independent experts, or the story does not contain research data to review (for example an opinion piece). If you are reporting on research that has yet to go through peer-review (eg. conference abstracts and preprints) be aware that the findings can change during the peer review process.

Opinion piece/editorial: This work is based on the opinions of the author(s)/institution.

A second IVF mix-up has occurred at Monash IVF. In a statement to the ASX, the company said "a patient's own embryo was incorrectly transferred to that patient, contrary to the treatment plan which designated the transfer of an embryo of the patient's partner". Earlier this year, the company made headlines after it announced that a woman had given birth to a genetically unrelated baby after an embryo mix-up at a Monash IVF fertility clinic in Brisbane. Below Australian experts comment.

Organisation/s: Australian Science Media Centre

Funder: N/A

Expert Reaction

These comments have been collated by the Science Media Centre to provide a variety of expert perspectives on this issue. Feel free to use these quotes in your stories. Views expressed are the personal opinions of the experts named. They do not represent the views of the SMC or any other organisation unless specifically stated.

Dr Christopher Rudge is a Lecturer in Health Law from the Sydney Law School and Deputy Director of the Sydney Health Law Centre at The University of Sydney

This error, which occurred in Victoria, is governed by the state's Assisted Reproductive Treatment Act 2008, a comprehensive legislative framework that has been in place for over a decade. By contrast, the error reported earlier this year at a Monash IVF clinic in Queensland occurred before Queensland's new, more robust ART laws of 2024 became fully operative; previously, the industry in that state operated under what was described as a 'self-regulatory regime'.

Accordingly, this Victorian incident presents a much clearer case where the regulatory authority – now the Secretary for the Department of Health, following the cessation of VARTA's operations at the end of 2024 – can fully exercise established monitoring and disciplinary functions. Critically, the Victorian Act mandates explicit patient consent for the specific kind of treatment procedure. Transferring an embryo different from the one designated in the treatment plan represents a breach of this consent requirement. The Department of Health will undoubtedly investigate whether the clinic's verification and witnessing systems, designed to prevent such human errors, failed.

The Act empowers the Secretary to impose conditions on the ART provider's registration or even suspend it if there are reasonable grounds for doing so, such as a contravention of registration conditions or a clear risk to patient welfare. The Victorian legislation also provides for penalties against designated officers for failures in their duties. This power to hold individuals accountable underscores the Department of Health's crucial role in ensuring patient safety and upholding public confidence in ART services in Victoria.

Last updated: 11 Jun 2025 11:14am
Declared conflicts of interest:
None declared.
Professor Jeremy Thompson is CSO of Fertilis Pty Ltd and an Adjunct Professor at The University of Adelaide

This recent episode, where a mix-up of embryos has occurred, is incredibly saddening. I feel for all concerned, especially the patients, but also the embryologists involved.

Being an embryologist places high demands on skills and concentration and can be stressful, particularly in busy laboratories, where skill and time management are critical for the best outcome from applying the multiple procedures conducted in the laboratory.

Globally, there is a shortage of well-trained and experienced embryologists, and as such, levels of training and experience can vary. Australia’s reputation as a leader in embryology training and technique auditing is beyond question.

Although there is not yet formal accreditation of embryologists in Australia, auditing is conducted through an arm of the Fertility Society of Australia and New Zealand, along with professional development programs conducted in states and nationally.

Last updated: 10 Jun 2025 3:10pm
Declared conflicts of interest:
He is the Chief Scientific Officer for Fertilis Pty Ltd, a company creating advanced medical devices for improving the outcomes for patients and embryologists
A/Professor Kuldip Sidhu is co-founder and director, CK Cell Technologies and Conjoint with University of New South Wales Medicine.

Continued mishappenings in IVF are of serious concern to patients, and it calls for more rigorous compliance required for this industry. 

While in New Zealand, Embryologists are registered with the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act, there is no such provision in Australia for embryologists, and they are not currently registered under a national scheme.  This would help in adding another layer of responsibility to check such mishappenings in the IVF industry. Although NATA oversees the IVF industry in Australia, more stringent management for inventory is required to minimise the risk of mix-up by implementing ISO 9001 system more rigorously.

Last updated: 10 Jun 2025 1:39pm
Declared conflicts of interest:
Kuldip Sidhu is co-founder and director, CK Cell Technologies
Dr Hilary Bowman-Smart is a Research Fellow at the University of South Australia

In reproductive care, trust is everything. Patients entrust clinics with embryos that may represent their only opportunity to have children. This mix-up - the second reported incident at Monash IVF - risks shaking confidence not just in one provider, but across the entire fertility sector. As more and more people are turning to commercial IVF providers when they make reproductive decisions, we need consistency and oversight in regulation across Australia. Accountability and transparency are critical to maintain trust.

Last updated: 17 Jun 2025 12:29pm
Declared conflicts of interest:
None declared.
Associate Professor Alex Polyakov is a Clinical Associate Professor at the Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne and is a Medical Director of Genea Fertility Melbourne

The report of a second embryo transfer error is profoundly troubling and, while still extremely rare, shifts this issue from an isolated anomaly to one demanding broader reflection.

IVF clinics operate within some of the most highly regulated and scrutinised environments in medicine. Multiple safeguards—including dual verification and electronic tracking—exist at every step to prevent precisely this kind of error. Australia’s assisted reproduction sector is internationally recognised for its rigorous oversight and quality control.

Although human error can never be entirely eliminated, incidents like this are not indicative of widespread system failure. Instead, they highlight the need to review how even robust systems respond to rare but serious breaches.

In over 40 years of IVF practice in Australia, these events remain statistical outliers—still extraordinarily uncommon. However, their emotional and ethical implications are significant, and concern among patients is entirely understandable.

This should prompt open investigation, continued transparency, and renewed commitment to patient safety. Australians can remain confident that the systems governing IVF are strong, and that they will continue to evolve in response to emerging challenges.

Last updated: 10 Jun 2025 12:01pm
Declared conflicts of interest:
Alex has declared he is a Medical Director of Genea Fertility Melbourne
Dr Evie Kendal is a bioethicist and public health scientist at Swinburne University of Technology

The news that another woman in Australia has had the wrong embryo transferred in an IVF procedure is likely to cause a lot of discomfort among other clients of assisted reproductive services, both here and overseas. Many of us feel immediate sympathy for the individuals involved and the complicated feelings this incident may have caused.

The case also opens up discussions of different definitions of kinship, including the genetic, gestational and social elements of motherhood that advances in reproductive technologies have separated into distinct components.

By introducing more areas of human intervention into reproduction, such technologies also introduce the potential for human error, as has been seen in these cases. Previous safeguards are clearly not up to the challenge of protecting clients against such incidents, and urgent ethical and policy guidance is needed to prevent such mistakes from occurring again.

As new technologies further expand and challenge our conception of the family, we need to stay focused on providing the circumstances for all children to be loved and cared for in society, including when things don't go to plan when using assisted reproduction.

Last updated: 07 Jul 2025 4:23pm
Declared conflicts of interest:
None declared.

News for:

Australia
VIC
SA

Media contact details for this story are only visible to registered journalists.