NMC Guidelines for IVF Clinics: How Can Fertility Institutions Communicate Their Services?
IVF and fertility clinics need to communicate service information to patients. A clinic may have a website explaining its departments and facilities, social media pages sharing health information, patient brochures, or public communications about the treatments it offers. The question following the new National Medical Commission (NMC) Guidelines on Ethical Advertising and Public Communication is not simply whether a fertility institution can communicate with the public. It is what information it can communicate, how it can present it, and where professional and ethical restrictions apply.
The guidelines distinguish between the restrictions applicable to Registered Medical Practitioners (RMPs) and the provisions dealing with hospital and medical institution advertising. They also address patient privacy, consent, testimonials, misleading claims, third-party promotion and other forms of public communication. For IVF clinics, understanding these distinctions is important before making changes to existing websites, brochures, advertisements or social media content.
What Does Clause 6 Say About Patient Privacy and Consent?
Clause 6 of the NMC Guidelines deals specifically with patient privacy and consent. For fertility institutions, this deserves particular attention because IVF treatment may involve highly personal medical information, treatment details, clinical images, and information about reproductive health.
Use of patient information for advertising — Clause 6.1
Clause 6.1 states that patient information, photographs, videos, medical records, clinical images, treatment details, testimonials and other identifiable information shall not be used for advertising purposes unless the use is permitted by applicable law and the necessary consent and other safeguards have been complied with. For an IVF clinic, this provision is relevant when considering the use of patient photographs, treatment stories, videos or identifiable clinical material in promotional content.
Before such material is published, the clinic must consider whether the proposed use is legally permitted and whether the required consent and safeguards are in place. The fact that a patient has completed treatment does not, by itself, establish that their information can be used for advertising.
Consent does not override advertising restrictions — Clause 6.2
Clause 6.2 makes an important distinction: patient consent alone does not make an otherwise prohibited advertising practice permissible. This applies to testimonials, endorsements, promotional patient stories, before-and-after depictions, success claims and other advertising practices that are prohibited under the guidelines or applicable law.
Consequently, obtaining a patient's permission should not be treated as a blanket authorisation to use their experience for promotional purposes. The proposed communication must also be assessed against the other applicable restrictions.
What makes consent valid? — Clause 6.3
Where consent is legally required, Clause 6.3 states that it must be specific, informed, voluntary, documented and capable of verification. It must also comply with applicable privacy and data-protection law. The form and mode of recording consent must be determined in accordance with the applicable law and the nature and purpose of the proposed use.
For a fertility institution, this means that consent should relate to the proposed use of the material rather than being treated as a general permission for every possible future use. The clinic should also be able to verify the consent when required.
Preventing unnecessary identification — Clause 6.4
Clause 6.4 addresses safeguards even where disclosure of patient information is legally permitted. Hospitals and medical institutions, as well as RMPs, have responsibilities to prevent unnecessary disclosure of patient names. The clause specifically refers to measures such as cropping, blurring or blacking out birthmarks, identification marks or other information through which a patient may be identified.
This is particularly relevant when preparing photographs, videos or clinical material for public communication. Removing a patient's name may not be sufficient if other visible details can still identify them. For IVF clinics, the practical point is clear: patient privacy must be considered at the content-preparation and publication stages, not merely when permission is obtained.
Can IVF Clinics Promote Their Services Under the New Guidelines?
Yes, the guidelines contain a provision allowing hospitals and medical institutions to disseminate specified categories of institutional information. However, this must not be confused with unrestricted promotional advertising. Under Clause 8.3, under the heading Hospital/Medical Institution Advertising, hospitals and medical institutions may communicate factual, objective and verifiable information concerning their name, location, contact details, departments, facilities, equipment, services, emergency services, accreditation status, charges and other institutional information permitted by applicable law.
For an IVF or fertility institution, this provides a basis for communicating relevant institutional information, subject to the limits set by the guidelines and other applicable law. For example, a clinic's public-facing communication may provide factual information about its location, contact details, available departments, facilities, equipment, services and charges, where permitted. Accreditation information may also be communicated factually and accurately.
The important distinction is between informing the public about the institution and using promotional claims to persuade patients through superiority, guarantees or inducements. Clause 8.3 expressly states that institutional communication must not contain patient solicitation, inducements, comparative superiority claims, guarantees of cure or treatment outcome, unverifiable or exaggerated claims, or promotional portrayal of an individual RMP. It also makes clear that the form, medium or frequency of communication must not turn otherwise factual information into solicitation or promotional self-aggrandisement. Therefore, the fact that information appears on a website, social media page, brochure or another communication channel does not remove the need to assess its content against the guidelines.
What Does Clause 8.1(ix) Mean for Claims About a Fertility Clinic?
Clause 8.1(ix) addresses comparative claims made by RMPs and hospitals or medical institutions. It states that claims such as “best”, “No.1”, “leading”, “most trusted”, “top”, “number one” and “unmatched”, or similar superiority claims, must not be made unless they are objectively verifiable, based on a transparent and independently ascertainable methodology, and otherwise permissible under applicable law.
The clause also addresses rankings and awards relied upon in advertising. Such claims must be capable of independent verification. Where necessary to avoid misleading the public, material conditions, methodology, relevant dates and details of the awarding organisation must be disclosed.
For IVF clinics, this provision is relevant when reviewing statements that present the institution as superior to other fertility centres. A claim should not be treated as acceptable simply because it is commonly used in marketing. If a clinic wishes to refer to a ranking or award, it should be able to verify the basis of that claim and assess whether its use is otherwise permissible.
This is not a general permission to use terms such as “best IVF clinic” or “No.1 fertility centre” whenever some supporting information exists. The conditions specified in the clause must be satisfied, along with the other applicable restrictions. The safer approach is to communicate verifiable institutional facts rather than rely on unsupported claims of superiority.
What Other Restrictions in Clause 8 Should IVF Clinics Understand?
Clause 8 contains several restrictions that are relevant to the way fertility services are presented to the public. These should be read alongside the provisions on institutional advertising, rather than in isolation.
Individual doctors and institutional communication are not treated identically
Clause 8.1 sets out advertising restrictions and permitted communications for RMPs. Among other things, it restricts patient solicitation and self-promotional activities, certain endorsements and testimonials, promotional use of patient cases and success stories, and statements that create unrealistic expectations or misrepresent treatment outcomes.
Clause 8.2 further restricts the use of celebrities, influencers, patients, employees or third parties to promote professional services through prohibited testimonials, endorsements or recommendations. It also prohibits using an intermediary to do indirectly what an RMP or institution is prohibited from doing directly. For this reason, a fertility clinic should not assume that a promotional activity is permissible simply because it is carried out by an agency, influencer or another third party. The nature of the communication and the applicable provision must be considered.
Marketing arrangements require attention
Clause 8.1 also addresses the engagement of advertising agencies, digital marketing agencies, influencers and online platforms. Such arrangements must not be structured so that payment or other consideration is linked to the procurement or referral of individual patients. The guidelines also prohibit commissions, referral fees, lead-generation fees and similar consideration in connection with the promotion or advertisement of medical services where linked to the referral, recommendation or procurement of patients, specimens or materials for medical services. A clinic reviewing its marketing arrangements should therefore distinguish between paying for legitimate communication services and arrangements linked to obtaining or referring individual patients. The terms and actual operation of the arrangement matter.
Discounts, packages and charges
Clause 8.1 addresses discounts, limited-period offers, contests, coupons, gifts, cashbacks, referral benefits, free procedures and similar inducements where they are likely to encourage unnecessary consultation, diagnostic investigation or treatment, or otherwise amount to patient solicitation. The same provision states that any lawful disclosure of charges, packages or fees must be factual, transparent and not misleading. This means clinics should review not only the amounts displayed publicly but also the way those amounts are presented. Information about fees or packages should not create a misleading impression or be used in a manner that falls within the prohibited inducements or solicitation described in the guidelines.
AI-generated promotional content
The guidelines also contain restrictions on AI-generated promotional campaigns and content. Commercial promotional campaigns generated by AI are prohibited under Clause 7.2. AI-generated content that conforms to the applicable guidelines and law must carry a source mark explicitly stating that its origin is AI. The clause further prohibits misleading, deceptive or unverifiable AI-generated or AI-assisted representations concerning diagnosis, treatment, clinical outcomes, professional qualifications, patient experiences or healthcare services. It also restricts the creation or manipulation of patient images, testimonials, voices and clinical outcomes, including synthetic endorsements presented as those of actual people. An IVF clinic using AI in its public communication should therefore assess the content against these specific restrictions rather than assume that labelling or disclosing AI use makes every promotional use permissible.
What Does Clause 8.3 Allow Doctors to Do?
Clause 8.3 also describes certain communications permitted for medical practitioners. It permits practitioners to deliver lectures or talks on public health and diseases for public awareness through television, radio and electronic media in their own name and designation, without promoting their employer organisation. It also permits health education and general-information pamphlets or brochures for patients visiting their clinic or hospital, provided these do not contain guarantees of cure, superiority claims, unsubstantiated claims or misleading information.
The clause further permits greetings on national days or days related to the medical profession, provided they do not contain advertising for professional gain. These provisions should be read carefully. They do not create a blanket exemption for all promotional content produced by a doctor or a clinic. In particular, the permission for an RMP to provide health education is distinct from the institutional provision allowing hospitals and medical institutions to disseminate factual information about their services. For a fertility institution, maintaining this distinction helps prevent educational communication and institutional information from being treated as unrestricted permission for promotional activity.
What Should an IVF Clinic Review Now?
A practical review can begin with the clinic's existing communication rather than a complete redesign of its marketing strategy. Start with the website, brochures, social media posts and other public-facing material. Check whether the information about the clinic's services, facilities, charges and accreditation is factual, objective and verifiable. Review claims that describe the clinic as the best, leading or superior to others, and ensure that any ranking or award relied upon meets the conditions in Clause 8.1(ix).
Next, review the use of patient photographs, videos, treatment details, testimonials and other identifiable information against every requirement in Clause 6. Consent must be legally appropriate and cannot override a separate prohibition on the proposed advertising practice. Finally, examine the role of doctors, agencies, influencers and other third parties in creating or publishing content. The clinic should pay particular attention to patient-referral arrangements, endorsements, inducements and any content that could create misleading expectations about treatment. These steps are a practical way to begin the review. They do not replace a provision-by-provision assessment where the proposed communication raises a specific legal question.
Conclusion
The new NMC Guidelines require careful attention to both the content of healthcare communication and the manner in which it reaches the public. For IVF and fertility institutions, Clause 6 addresses the use of patient information and the safeguards surrounding consent. Clause 8 sets out restrictions on advertising and professional communication, while Clause 8.3 provides a defined scope for factual, objective and verifiable institutional information.
The distinction matters. A fertility institution can communicate relevant information about its services within the scope permitted by the guidelines, but that does not amount to unrestricted permission to use patient stories, make treatment guarantees, rely on unsupported superiority claims or solicit patients through prohibited promotional practices. The objective should be to make institutional information clear and accessible while keeping patient privacy, factual accuracy and professional restrictions at the centre of public communication.
Need Legal Guidance on IVF Clinic Advertising?
Lexcuriam LLP advises healthcare professionals, fertility clinics, hospitals and medical institutions on healthcare law, regulatory requirements and medico-legal matters. If your institution is reviewing its website, social media, patient-related content or service information under the new NMC Guidelines, legal review can help assess the applicable provisions and identify areas that may require attention.