implanting an excessive number of embryos in the woman dubbed “Octomom” ended last week and a decision is now pending on whether he can keep his California medical license. During the November 18 closing hearing in Los Angeles, State Deputy Attorney General Judith Alvarado said Michael Kamrava’s poor decision-making is a danger to his patients and lobbied for his medical license to be revoked. She said he conducted fertility experiments on unknowing patients and wrongly gave in to the demands of Nadya Suleman, Octomom, by implanting 12 embryos inside her. Kamrava told the panel he and the now 35-year-old mother first met in 1997, when she came to him with the goal of giving birth to 10 kids. “On average, it was more than others want, however I didn’t make any judgment on that; that’s a personal decision,” Kamrava said, adding that Suleman had already been taking hormones to increase her chances for becoming pregnant when they first met. Kamrava told the panel that Suleman first underwent artificial insemination under his care, but the procedure didn’t take. In less than eight years, Kamrava repeatedly performed in vitro fertilization for Suleman, implanting her with 60 fresh embryos resulting in a total of 14 children. Kamrava said he implanted many embryos for each pregnancy, but his goal was always to have single-child pregnancies. In her argument to have Kamrava’s license revoked, Alvarado argued that the Iranian- American “deliberately” ignored standard medical practices. “This is not a situation of not knowing better, but rather of deliberately ignoring the standards of care,” Alvarado said. “He chose to engage in an unsafe pattern of practice that spanned over a number of years,” she said. But defending attorney Henry Fenton said his client, with 30 years of experience in the field, was faced with a tough decision when Suleman didn’t allow him to freeze or destroy her embryos. According to the defense, Suleman demanded having all 12 embryos implanted in-side of her and then reportedly failed to come in for any fetal reduction procedures. During the hearing, Kamrava testified that he attempted to contact Suleman to follow up after the procedure, and that he only learned of the record-setting multiple birth after the octuplets had already been delivered. Kamrava offered an emotional apology for implanting Suleman with so many embryos— six times the norm for a woman her age—but said he felt he didn’t have a choice. During his testimony last week, Kamrava also claimed that his patient knew she was part of a study on fertility methods because she volunteered for it. Kamrava said, “She heard about it, we discussed it with her and she volunteered.” Alvarado, however, said Suleman had not signed any forms acknowledging that she was involved in an experiment and asserted that Suleman could not have known she was volunteering to become a “human guinea pig.” According to federal regulation, patients must give their consent before being involved in medical studies. Although Suleman, whose father is Iraqi, is his most famous client, Kamrava is also accused of other questionable practices relating to in vitro fertilization. In one case, Kamrava is accused of implanting seven embryos in a 48-year-old woman, resulting in quadruplets, with one fetus dying before birth. In another case, Kamrava is said to have gone ahead with in vitro fertilization when he should have waited for a patient to be screened for cancer. She was later diagnosed with stage-three cancer and had to have her uterus and ovaries removed before undergoing chemotherapy. “I’m sorry for what happened,” Kamrava said fighting back tears during his emotional testimony. “When I look back at it, I wish I had never done it and it will never happen again.” The American Society of Reproductive Medicine expelled Kamrava in September, saying his behavior was detrimental to the medical industry. Judge Daniel Juarez now has 60 days to draft an opinion on Kamrava’s license to submit to the Medical Board of California for consideration. The board then has 90 days to make a decision on whether or not Kamrava can keep his medical license and continue practicing medicine in the state.
by Grace Nasri