Recently, BRCA testing has garnered considerable attention, especially in the realm of reproductive medicine. BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations are known to significantly increase the risk of breast and ovarian cancers. But as we begin considering their routine inclusion in IVF workups, we must ask: Are we proactively protecting future generations, or are we crossing into ethically uncertain territory? In India, regulatory guidelines limit the number of donations from a donor to only a single recipient, placing significant constraints on donor selection. Moreover, potential genetic risks are already evaluated during donor screening through a detailed family and medical history. Sperm banks are careful to exclude donors with a known history of hereditary diseases that could impact the offspring. In addition, donors undergo stringent infectious disease screening, including sexually transmitted diseases like HIV, hepatitis B and C, and syphilis, to safeguard recipient health. These processes significantly mitigate both genetic and health-related risks. This is not to undermine the value of BRCA or other genetic testing when clinically indicated. BRCA testing should be offered in IVF when there is a relevant personal or family history of cancers or where BRCA genes have been detected in the family. Couples who have experienced repeated miscarriages or have had a previous pregnancy loss where a genetic abnormality was found may benefit from more comprehensive genetic testing. For women above the age of 35, another layer of screening becomes important: preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A). This is not about hereditary mutations but chromosomal abnormalities, which are more common as maternal age advances and lead to conditions like Down’s Syndrome in the child or recurrent miscarriages and IVF failures. PGT-A screens the embryos ensure that only chromosomally normal embryos are transferred into the uterus thus improving IVF success rates in older women. Genetic screening plays a valuable role in safeguarding the health of future generations, but its use must be balanced with clinical relevance and ethical responsibility. The patients need extensive counselling on the procedure as it is invasive testing where afew cells are removed from the embryo and tested. In a small percentage because of mosaicism in embryo, there are also false positive reports (where abnormality is detected when none exists) and false negative reports (where abnormality exists but the report states a normal embryo). Patients must also be made aware of alternative methods of testing the child during pregnancy like NIPT (non invasive prenatal testing) and level 2 ultrasound during pregnancy to help them to take an informed decision. However, incorporating BRCA testing or any advanced genetic screening into the routine workup for all IVF patients can significantly increase the financial burden of an already expensive procedure. While such tests are undoubtedly important in certain high-risk cases, they should be recommended judiciously, based on personal or family history, recurrent pregnancy loss or IVF failures, or previously identified genetic abnormalities. A targeted, case-by-case approach remains the most ethical and effective path forward in reproductive care.