Private fertility clinics: Increasing incidents in ‘very safe’ sector

Prospective parents who begin a fertility journey with the assistance of a private clinic are profoundly vulnerable. Patients have typically already been through an emotionally fraught period of trying to conceive, sometimes tied to medical complications, and they most often feel desperate for planned IVF treatment to be successful.

For most, there is a massive emotional and financial strain. Private fertility treatment is big business because of this, with individuals and couples willing to part with huge sums of money in order to start or complete a family.

In the context of this patient vulnerability, how safe is this treatment?

The UK’s Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) published their safety report in 2024/25, which said that incidents reported to the HFEA increased by more than a third since 2024/25. However, they maintain that fertility treatment remains ‘very safe’, with 99% of almost 100,000 annual IVF cycles being completed without significant incident. 

However, when rare ‘significant incidents’ do occur, they can have devastating impact; in December 2025 a major international investigation found that 67 clinics across 14 countries, including the UK, had been sold sperm belonging to a Danish doctor whose sperm harboured a TP53 gene mutation. This mutation causes Li-Faumeni syndrome which gives children up to a 90% chance of developing cancer. At least 197 children were fathered by the donor and some have already died or developed cancer. The comments from the HFEA regarding this incident reflect how incredibly rare these incidents are, with statistics reflecting those akin to aviation disaster.

Aside from clinical safety, does it follow that there is commercial safety for patients? 

In December 2025, The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) published a report to tackle misleading claims in ads from fertility clinics. ASA used AI to identify potentially problematic ads and across 2024/2025, which saw more than 60 clinics breaking advertising rules, with common issues being ‘unproven superiority claims’, success rates advertised as percentages without making clear the number of patients treated and success rates framed as ‘clinical pregnancy rates’ rather than ‘live birth rates’. While ASA claims they have had huge success in getting clinics to amend advertising, and says that "most ads are now clear and accurate", they concede that even "a small number of misleading ones can affect people making important life decisions".

In 2025 the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) shared guidance from their fertility guideline committee which also suggested the patients were being sold fertility treatment ‘add-ons’ which were unproven to work. Add-ons such as testing the lining of the womb ‘endometrial receptivity testing’ before embryo transfer, and intracytoplasmic sperm injections for men with healthy semen. Dr Fergus MacBeth, chair of NICE’s fertility guideline committee, suggested that these treatments may do more harm than good for vulnerable patients. There are also reports that IVF patients are using unregulated ‘concierge clinics’ who act as a middleman between the patient and the treatment provider, and who have cost patients thousands when some of them go bust before treatment can begin.

And psychological safety? 

There have been many reports of embryos being lost or destroyed by clinics, leading to psychological devastation for couples and leading to successful civil claims with five-figure settlements. Other incidents include a mix-up of patient embryos with similar devastating impact.

Conclusion

As the private fertility industry continues to grow, so do the risks for patients, providers and indemnifiers, and it remains correct to challenge whether there is sufficient patient safety and regulatory oversight. Providers should ensure they have sound legal cover, with adequate medical malpractice insurance in place to protect their reputation and ability to deal with any incidents. Insurers in this space need to ensure clear policy wording around coverage and ensuring appropriate regulation is in place. 

There is a real need for systemic security with fail-safe systems in place to mitigate risk, following NICE guidance and adhering to the Code of Practice set by the HFEA. For patients, they should always use a HFEA regulated clinic and ensure enough time is taken to research their chosen clinic, and to then engage in continuous dialogue with the clinic as to how their physical, commercial and psychological safety will be managed in each step of the fertility journey.

At Browne Jacobson, we have a wealth of specialist maternity and fertility expertise and we offer support to healthcare providers as they strive to improve patient care and safety. Our maternity and neonatal expertise spans multiple disciplines, allowing us to deliver a fully integrated service that meets the evolving needs of healthcare providers.