Fertility and Sterility, 125(1), 178, 2026

"Reply of the authors: ""Response to ""The illusion of reproductive choice: how restorative reproductive medicine violates informed consent for infertility treatment"""""

Eve C. Feinberg , Benjamin J. Peipert , Jamie T. Kuhlman

Author affiliations (3)
  • Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois. ROR
  • University of Pennsylvania ROR
  • Tennessee Department of Education ROR

Hostile to restorative reproductive medicine

DOI10.1016/j.fertnstert.2025.10.019 PMID41475699
Read at publisher

Abstract not indexed. Read at publisher

Topics

restorative reproductive medicine informed consent infertility, RRM reproductive choice fertility treatment disclosure, Peibert Kuhlman Feinberg RRM ethics, fertility treatment informed consent reproductive autonomy, NaProTECHNOLOGY patient education fertility counseling, restorative reproductive medicine treatment alternatives, RRM shared decision making fertility care, reproductive counseling endometriosis natural fertility, assisted reproduction informed choice education, fertility patient education RRM framework, reproductive ethics informed consent fertility treatment, body literacy fertility awareness informed choice
PMID 41475699 41475699 DOI 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2025.10.019 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2025.10.019

Cite this article

Peipert BJ, Kuhlman JT, & Feinberg EC (2026). Reply of the authors: “Response to “The illusion of reproductive choice: how restorative reproductive medicine violates reproductive autonomy and informed consent”” by Stanford et al. *Fertility and Sterility*, *125*(1), 178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2025.10.019

Related articles