In a dramatic turn of events that has left many in distress, patients of a popular IVF concierge clinic, Apricity Fertility, are grappling with significant losses after the company abruptly ceased operations, leaving clients without treatments or refunds. Reports indicate that these unregulated “concierge clinics” are becoming increasingly common, acting as intermediaries between patients, egg donors, and doctors, but without the regulatory oversight that traditional clinics are subjected to. The case of Syreeta Sandhu, who lost nearly £15,000, has raised alarms about the operational integrity of such services and the consequences for vulnerable patients seeking fertility treatments.
Syreeta Sandhu, a 40-year-old mother from England who sought to conceive her third child after four unsuccessful IVF cycles and five painful miscarriages, exemplifies the plight faced by many in this scenario. In December 2022, just as her treatment was about to commence, she received a shocking notification via the Apricity app: the company was shutting down operations on January 1. The aftermath left her in a state of frustration and anger as the clinic King’s Fertility, which had been contracted for her treatment, informed her they could not access her medical records or donor details since Apricity had not made the necessary payments. This lack of communication and the collapsing of trust after months of patient-doctor rapport have compounded her distress.
The situation isn’t isolated to Sandhu; 52 other patients claim a total of £119,000 from Apricity, leaving many without the IVF treatments they desperately sought. The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA), the UK’s fertility regulatory body, has acknowledged that these concierge clinics operate outside its jurisdiction, highlighting a critical regulatory gap. Clare Ettinghausen, a director at HFEA, has emphasized the pressing need to update fertility laws to incorporate modern clinics and the services they provide.
Patients like Beth Rodgers, a 32-year-old from Belfast diagnosed with Turner syndrome, have also been adversely affected. Rodgers and her partner had invested around £4,600 with Apricity to secure a donor egg due to the scarcity of such donors in Northern Ireland. After hearing about Apricity’s unexpected closure, they too experienced a lack of communication, unable to reach the clinic and left uncertain about their financial recourse. While they managed to recoup a part of their costs through insurance, the overall financial gaps left from additional fees for appointments present another layer of complication for these patients.
The circumstances of Jonathan, yet another patient who paid around £10,000 for IVF treatments, reveal the financial difficulties encountered by couples drawn into this precarious sector. Despite investing their savings and taking a loan for treatment, they have been informed there was “no realistic chance” of recovering their losses, with potential prospects of reopening treatment still being hampered by funds shortage.
The unforeseen collapse of Apricity, attributed to a last-minute withdrawal of vital investment, underscores deeper systemic issues within the emerging model of fertility care facilitated by digital platforms. These clinics, while appealing for their convenience, lack the physical infrastructure and regulatory framework that traditional IVF clinics possess. As a result, patients are left navigating a labyrinth of complications without the necessary support or recourse.
Experts in the field, including Prof Emily Jackson from the London School of Economics, have urged potential patients to opt for HFEA-licensed clinics which carry responsibilities to inform and assist patients if closures occur. Such licensed facilities are not only bound by strict regulations but also have protocols for managing patients’ records and ensuring the safety of preserved biological materials.
The Department of Health and Social Care is actively considering reforms concerning the regulatory framework surrounding these digital clinics, though the process remains ongoing. As the demand for alternative fertility treatment solutions grows, the need for regulatory clarity and patient protection becomes increasingly urgent. Future patients seeking assistance are thus encouraged to engage in thorough research and exercise caution, especially when substantial upfront payments are involved to avoid such distressing situations as those faced by Syreeta Sandhu, Beth Rodgers, and countless others.