PGT-A on Trial: Interview with the Lawyer Taking On the Fertility Industry

At the Center for Human Reproduction (CHR), we’ve long raised concerns about the widespread use of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A)—a test that’s often presented to patients as essential, despite mounting evidence that its benefits are overstated and its risks under-communicated. In a powerful new episode of The Egg Factor, CHR Medical Director Dr. Norbert Gleicher sat down with someone who’s become a leading voice on this issue from outside the medical world: attorney Allison Freeman.

Allison is not only a practicing lawyer—she’s also an IVF patient and mother who found herself questioning the role PGT-A played in her own fertility journey. That questioning ultimately led her to spearhead a wave of class-action lawsuits against some of the biggest players in the genetic testing industry, alleging false marketing and harm to patients.

In the exclusive Q&A below, Allison shares what drove her to take legal action, the stories she’s heard from others impacted by PGT-A, and why this moment is a wake-up call for the fertility industry—and a call to empowerment for patients everywhere.

What inspired you to pursue law, and how did you find your way into reproductive justice and fertility law specifically? Do you have a personal connection to it? 

I pursued law after watching my dad in court at 5 years old. I decided then and there that I wanted to be a lawyer and it never changed. I found my way into reproductive justice and fertility law after my own experience with fertility treatments which then led to others asking for my advice. Over time I realized there was a real need to help and I wanted to provide that. 

Was there a particular case or moment in your career that made you realize, “This is the work I’m meant to be doing”?

When I was told by someone that they felt heard and understood for the very first time and that they knew I would do everything to fight for them. 

This lawsuit is deeply personal for many patients. How do you stay grounded and connected to the people behind the cases you take on?

I think because I have been there. I went through fertility treatments so I see a side of it that many cannot. Worst club, best members is true because you really do not fully understand it until you have been through it

What do you wish more people understood about the legal side of reproductive medicine?

That you have rights. So many are afraid to ask questions or speak up. 

For those who aren’t familiar, can you give us a brief overview of what this lawsuit is about and how it began?

The lawsuits are class action consumer protection cases that have been filed against 6 testing labs and 1 clinic that sells its own testing. The lawsuits allege that these defendants sell PGT-A testing with false and misleading claims, such as the testing’s ability to increase the chance of a healthy baby, decrease the chances of miscarriage, and its extremely high accuracy rating.

The lawsuits began because I had a friend who had one embryo and then suddenly zero followed by another friend who had four embryos and then suddenly zero all due to this test, so I started to investigate. I first looked into it as someone who went through IVF and had also been strongly sold this test. Then that led to looking at the test and the issues surrounding it as a lawyer, which led me to believe there might be something actionable. However, we still researched it even more and I reached out to governmental agencies, senators, and state attorneys before ultimately deciding that litigation may be the only avenue to create some change. At that point we found our amazing team that was willing to pursue these cases with us. 

What initially drew you to this case? Was there a specific patient story or moment that made it feel personal or urgent?

That first friend of mine. When she and I sat at lunch together talking about her experience, I just couldn’t believe where her journey had taken her. It just didn’t make sense that this test had such control over what had happened and any choice she and her husband had in the matter. That kept me up at night.

Listening to her also reminded me of the people who had sold PGT-A to me during my journey and how they had told me I shouldn’t do IVF without it. In fact, their pushing me so hard is part of why I think I turned it down. I am stubborn and it sounded too good to be true. 

You’ve spoken with many patients affected by PGT-A. Can you share one or two stories that really stuck with you?

Honestly, I hear stories weekly and sometimes daily that stick with me and keep me moving forward with these cases. 

There are stories of people who have fought so hard to have their “abnormal” embryos, or even their “mosaic” embryos, transferred against every loud voice who told them not to and made them feel guilty throughout their pregnancy to have healthy babies and even then still struggle with it.

Stories of people who have transferred “normal” embryos that they were told would be perfect, healthy babies to find themselves grieving the loss of a baby with an abnormality that was missed by testing which they thought was impossible and makes the loss even harder to comprehend.

Also stories of people who spend almost every day wondering what if? What if they had transferred their embryos that they were told they could not. What if they had not been pushed so quickly to donor eggs or sperm?

What surprised you most in hearing how this impacted real people—not just in theory, but in lived experience?

How many people have told me they didn’t know and they wish they would have known. It is hard being the reason people are learning something so big as it relates to their fertility treatments and all the decisions they made over the years. I feel awful most of the time that this didn’t happen sooner.

Many patients trusted that these tests were rooted in solid science. What was the general emotional response when they learned that may not be the case?

Sadness for sure and then some frustration. Also a desire to keep it from continuing to happen to others. 

What are the main claims in the case—and what do you hope this lawsuit could ultimately change?

The main claims in the case are violations of various state consumer protection laws. There are also claims for breach of warranty and fraud.

Has there been significant pushback from testing labs or the fertility industry? What form has that taken?

From a legal standpoint, we have received 4 motions to dismiss and 1 motion for judgment on the pleadings thus far. The other 2 have not yet received responses. Essentially the motions are saying that our cases do not have standing or legal basis to proceed. 

From a technical standpoint, I have definitely seen a few different responses. Some say that PGT-A testing has been sold in a false and misleading way in the US and it is about time for these suits and for change. Meanwhile many others have made no changes as it relates to PGT-A. They continue to make the same false and misleading claims and/or focus on other claims about its accuracy and utility.  

How difficult has it been to build a legal case in a space where science and patient care are so intertwined?

It has not been difficult. It has just made me into a huge nerd who geeks out on reading all of the science, but that is nothing new. Science is the root of IVF and many IVF patients love to hear about the science, so I think many of us believe that science is just part of being a patient. We welcome the two being intertwined.

PGT-A has become nearly routine in many IVF clinics. Why do you think it gained such widespread use despite the lack of evidence in certain populations?

The claims being made in the sale of the test despite the lack of evidence. If you are pursuing assisted reproductive technology to have a child after struggling to grow your family, and you are told there is a test with a 97 to 99% accuracy rate that can increase the success of your IVF, decrease the chance of miscarriage, lead to a higher chance of pregnancy, reduce the time to pregnancy, increase live birth rate, increase the chance of implantation and pregnancy, and reduce the time and cost of pregnancy, it is hard to see how it wouldn’t gain widespread use. 

What are your thoughts on how private equity involvement or clinic business models may have influenced the spread of this technology?

I think it has increased its use. The truth is that private equity involvement has changed fertility treatments in general. The individuals at the top have business experience, not medical. I saw it in my own experience when my doctors’ practice was purchased by a private equity involved clinic. Suddenly, my treatment was more regimented with less individualized care and PGT-A was something I would be insane to pass on. 

What changes do you hope to see—both legally and within IVF practice—once this lawsuit gains more attention?

I hope people learn about the pros and cons of PGT-A so they can decide whether the test would benefit their IVF treatment. Then, if patients decide to test, I hope they are better able to understand what the results mean and utilize the information to make decisions about their embryos which will be supported and not refused.

I also hope these lawsuits raise awareness that we are going to hold the fertility industry, which is poorly regulated with little to no oversight, accountable. 

Do you see this case setting a precedent for other challenges to fertility industry standards?

I hope so. I hope it leads to truth and transparency as it relates to treatment and all things related to treatment, such as add-ons. 

What can patients do now if they’re navigating these decisions and feel overwhelmed or unsure?

I have told people if you are unsure about testing, at the very least don’t agree to discard your embryos based upon their result until you know how your journey is going to go and are certain how you want to proceed. 

Allison Freeman’s story is a powerful reminder that patients are not just participants in their care—they are advocates, truth-seekers, and, when necessary, agents of change. Her legal efforts, combined with her personal experience, shed critical light on the need for greater transparency, informed consent, and patient-centered practices in reproductive medicine—especially when it comes to PGT-A.

At CHR, we share her concerns and have long urged caution around the routine use of this test. We believe every patient deserves access to the full picture: the benefits, the limitations, and the alternatives. If you’re considering PGT-A or have questions about how it may (or may not) fit into your care, we invite you to reach out. Informed decisions start with honest conversations—and we’re here for yours.