The article aims to elaborate the progress made in partial ectogenesis research on sheep as well as human embryos. Since the ban on embryos experimentation after the 14-day window is a major roadblock in terms of partial ectogenesis research, the authors have weighed the possibility that such a ban could be reconsidered. In favor of easing such a restriction, it may be argued that: (a) unlike the Catholic approach, prevalent ethics precepts hold that the embryo's interest ought to be balanced against the interests of the other parties involved; (b) an extension of the 14-day deadline would no longer make ethically untenable practices acceptable; hence, the "slippery slope" argument, although generally worthy, would not conclusively apply to partial ectogenesis; (c) in mainstream embryo research efforts, there is a conflict between the lives of embryos and the health of individuals already born; as for partial ectogenesis, however, such a conflict would be between the lives of embryos and the lives of fetuses which would not survive otherwise. Still, in light of the embryo's status as a human being, the authors conclude that such research practices should only be allowed on supernumerary embryos.