What would Aldous Huxley say? The pioneer behind in vitro fertilization gets the Nobel Prize, new research determines the probability of successful embryos, and children created with donor gametes want to know more about their "genetic parents."

Scientists observing the behavior of one-celled embyros recently got an eyeful.

"The idea in embryology has been that early human development is somewhat chaotic," said Renee Reijo Pera of Stanford's Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine. "But actually it's so precise, you can write a computer program that models it."

I'm not sure if that statement from a scientist at the university research hospital where I had several unsuccessful in vitro fertilizations a few years back made me feel better or worse.  Apparently "so predictable is the path of healthy development" that  a Stanford team was able to summarize it in a mathematical algorithm, then construct a computer program.

Damn, I always was lousy at math.

And then there was a Catholic guilt-inducing line about the discovery about what makes embryos live or die:

"Specifically, they've identified an inherited defect in what's called 'gene expression,' which mangles the message from the mother's DNA to the future embryo."

It's the first time I've ever been referred to as a mother, but apparently I wasn't a very good one.  Did I mangle the message?

The new embryo findings were published coincidentally on the same day that the Nobel prize for medicine was awarded to Robert G. Edwards, an English biologist who with a physician colleague, Patrick Steptoe, developed the in vitro fertilization procedure for treating human infertility. It seems not a day goes by without some new discovery or implication associated with assisted reproductive medicine. The science gets the headlines, but the stories about those pursuing (or the result of) reproductive medicine are less often heard.

For those who move forward with donor eggs or donor sperm, challenges have been documented ranging from semantics to identity. There's the mother who wrote to her reproductive endocrinologist looking for guidance on donor disclosure following a heated argument after her daughter's use of the phrase "genetic mom."  

The mother explains, "I took offense to her use of the term 'mom' and immediately corrected her, saying 'you mean donor, honey'. This started a huge argument and has created a tense rift that still exists."

She then goes on to ask whether it's advisable or even moral or legal to help her daughter seek out the woman who donated her eggs. This human drama previews an even more mind-bending story. It concerns a donor conceived child in Australia who managed to locate her biological father and had the surreal experience of introducing her parents to each other for the first time.

She observed: "It made me feel sad to witness the profound disconnection between my biological parents. If I was conceived from a brief relationship at least they might have danced together. I know some people will tell me that it is ridiculous to feel this way, and it shouldn't matter, but it does matter to me. Being conceived from two strangers feels like it erodes my sense of humanity."

The delicate dance between science and human drama continues. The Stanford researcher marveled at what she learned about embryonic destiny:  "It continues to surprise me," she said, "that we're even here."

Now removed from the world of assisted reproductive technology, I  watch with a mixture of curiosity and fascination what comes next in the learnings about the creation of new life, as well as the new questions and very real narratives that will certainly follow.  

Pamela Mahoney Tsigdinos is the author of the award-winning book Silent Sorority: A (Barren) Woman Gets Busy, Angry, Lost and Found.