FERTILITY treatments have dominated the news - this summer, with one following another. We had the announcement in Britain of the decision to dispose of more than 5,000 frozen embryos which had been stored for five years and whose parents could not be traced.

There was also the story of the woman pregnant with twins who had one aborted. We heard of another woman on fertility treatment who was advised not to have intercourse because of the risk of a multiple pregnancy but ignored that advice and is now pregnant with octuplets. She has been advised that the only way to ensure the survival of some of her babies is for some to be aborted, which she has rejected.

At the weekend, controversy was generated here when it rumoured that a private clinic offering fertility services intended to freeze embryos, but this was subsequently denied by the clinic. This highlighted the absence of any controlling legislation in the Republic.

We must acknowledge the joy of thousands of couples, both in Ireland and abroad, who have benefited from successful fertility treatments. In a society which places such emphasis on the importance of family life, we must sympathise with those who desire a family but cannot have one, and celebrate with those medical science can now help.

The question, however, remains have medical advances gone too far in the area of fertility treatments? Are there procedures which, though possible and offering the prospect of success, should not be undertaken for ethical reasons? More specifically, are we in danger of treating tiny embryos as mere customer products, meeting the demands of childless couples but to be discarded when no longer required?

When all the emotion is stripped away, what ethical questions are raised for us by these eases? It seems to me there are at least two.

First, there is the issue of selective abortion after a pregnancy is under way. This arose for the woman pregnant with twins who only wanted one, and also in the case of the octuplets.

There can be few medical ethical issues better known to the Irish public than that of abortion, and while it is impossible to summarise that debate, it is, I believe, fair to say that most Irish people are opposed to abortion in all but the most exceptional cases.

Opinions will vary as to what, if anything, constitutes an exceptional case (the X case, pregnancy after rape, risk to the mother's life?) and whether such cases can ever, in fact, arise.

But there would be a widespread consensus against abortion on demand or simply because a parent didn't want twins. There would also be widespread opposition to abortion as a way of dealing with a multiple pregnancy as a result of fertility treatment.

We could go further and say that any fertility treatment which might possibly create a situation where abortion might have to be an option would be unacceptable.

The second issue centres on the way we deal with an embryo in a laboratory. When a couple is experiencing difficulty with conception it is sometimes possible to remove an ovum from the woman and mix it with semen from the man in a laboratory.

And if it fertilises the embryo can then be placed in the woman's womb and a normal pregnancy results. The simplicity of this description ignores the complexity of the procedure and the relatively poor success rate on any one occasion.

Removing an ovum from a woman involves a minor operation to enable a fertility drug can to be given so that a number of ova are produced and can be removed at the same time. Fertilisation is difficult so several ova are exposed to the semen. If one fertilises than it is placed in the womb so that pregnancy can begin.

But what if more than one fertilises, more than one can safely be placed in the womb, given the risk to both mother and babies of a multiple pregnancy?

It is possible to freeze some of the embryos so that they can be used on a subsequent occasion if that pregnancy doesn't happen or for a subsequent pregnancy.

We can certainly marvel at the technology, and very many childless couples are prepared to undergo it, but it is fraught with ethical questions. What if the couple don't want a subsequent pregnancy and have no use for the frozen embryo. It is here that the major questions arise.

What should be done with these "spare" embryos? They could be given to other childless couples as a form of pre natal adoption but this would require the consent of the original parents. Is that acceptable?

A CENTRAL question in all of this is the status of the human embryo at this very, early stage, when it is simply a cluster of cells no bigger than a full stop on this page. Is it a human person even before it has been placed in the womb?

Before we try to answer that question consider our reactions in other situations. A significant number of naturally fertilised ova never implant in the womb at all or are lost shortly afterwards. Do we regard these as "deaths"?

When a couple loses a baby in the later stages of pregnancy there is certainly a sense of a death having occurred, and parents will grieve. What of a loss at the very early stage? Is that the same? Or is it more a sense of regret of what might have been?

We can't generalise from the feelings of individuals - everyone will react differently - but perhaps the questions help us realise that there are no easy answers in this area. Some will still want to answer that life begins at conception and that all such treatments should be outlawed. Others may be reluctant to rush in with firm answers to very complex questions.

And yet, in the midst of all these debates, there are the couples who desperately want a child and have to decide whether to go down this route. There are also those who have already picked their way through the ethical minefield and have used these techniques successfully to bring about new life. Then there is the need for legislation and the difficulty in framing it.

These issues won't go away and will need clear and responsible debate if they are to be addressed. Have we the courage to face them and come up with some answers of our own?