51
|
Schrijvers AM, van Rooij FB, Overbeek G, de Reus E, Schoonenberg M, van der Veen F, Visser M, Bos HMW, Mochtar MH. Psychosocial counselling for intended parents who opt for donor sperm treatment: which topics do they find relevant? J Reprod Infant Psychol 2019; 38:474-484. [PMID: 31852263 DOI: 10.1080/02646838.2019.1702632] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to explore which topics intended parents who opt for donor sperm treatment find relevant to discuss in psychosocial counselling. Background: The choice for donor sperm treatment has psychosocial implications for intended parents and therefore psychosocial counselling is advised as an integral part of DST. To date, little is known about which topics intended parents find relevant to discuss in psychosocial counselling. Methods: We conducted 25 semi-structured in-depth interviews between 2015 and 2017 with heterosexual men and women, lesbian women and single women who opted for donor sperm treatment and had a counselling session as part of their intake. They were recruited through three Dutch fertility centres, three network organisations and by snowball sampling. Results: Intended parents found it relevant to discuss the following seven topics in psychosocial counselling: the decision to opt for donor sperm treatment, choosing a sperm donor, coping with questions from family and friends, non-genetic parenthood, single motherhood, openness and disclosure, and future contact between the child and half-siblings. Conclusion: We recommend that counsellors take a more active role in bringing up the topics found in our study and that a clear distinction is made between counselling with the aim to screen intended parents and counselling with the aim to offer guidance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A M Schrijvers
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Center for Reproductive Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam , Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,Research Institute of Child Development and Education, University of Amsterdam , Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - F B van Rooij
- Research Institute of Child Development and Education, University of Amsterdam , Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - G Overbeek
- Research Institute of Child Development and Education, University of Amsterdam , Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - E de Reus
- VivaNeo MC Kinderwens , Leiderdorp, the Netherlands
| | - M Schoonenberg
- Fertility Center Nij Geertgen , Elsendorp, the Netherlands
| | - F van der Veen
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Center for Reproductive Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam , Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M Visser
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Center for Reproductive Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam , Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - H M W Bos
- Research Institute of Child Development and Education, University of Amsterdam , Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M H Mochtar
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Center for Reproductive Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam , Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
52
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND The United States has the highest number of oocyte donation cycles, which account for an estimated one-quarter of all worldwide oocyte donation cycles. Although there has been a steady rise in oocyte donation treatment, understanding the kinship views of those intimately involved is lacking. These include women oocyte donors and parents who received donor oocytes to establish a pregnancy. PURPOSE To explore the views and perspectives about genetic relationships and lineages among women who were oocyte donors and parents who received donated oocytes 10 to 12 years after donors and parents underwent oocyte donation procedures to establish a pregnancy. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS A longitudinal cohort of pregnant women who received donor oocytes participated in an expanded, follow-up study 12 years postpregnancy that included the women's heterosexual partners and biological fathers. Women who donated oocytes anonymously 10 to 12 years prior also participated. Qualitative content analysis was used to analyze participants' in-depth interviews. RESULTS Six women who received donor oocytes and their heterosexual partners and biological fathers (n = 6), representing 12 children conceived by oocyte donation, and 3 women who donated oocytes anonymously representing 3 children participated. Themes that emerged from the women oocyte donors included a reexamination of anonymity and contact with recipient families, managing disclosure to their own children about possible half-siblings, and potential for consanguinity. For recipient parents, there was an overwhelming sense of gratitude to the women oocyte donors, concerns about navigating genetic information gaps, and contemplating future contact with the donors and/or half-siblings. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS Nurses can play a vital role in supporting and educating women oocyte donors and recipient parents about navigating complex relationship issues in donor kinships.
Collapse
|
53
|
Kennett D, Reisel D, Harper J. Genetic databases and donor anonymity. Hum Reprod 2019; 34:1848-1849. [DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dez143] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/07/2019] [Revised: 04/04/2019] [Accepted: 04/26/2019] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- D Kennett
- Department of Genetics, Evolution and Environment, University College London, Darwin Building, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - D Reisel
- Institute for Women’s Health, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - J Harper
- Institute for Women’s Health, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| |
Collapse
|
54
|
Macpherson I. Ethical reflections about the anonymity in gamete donation. Hum Reprod 2019; 34:1847-1848. [DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dez142] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/07/2019] [Revised: 04/04/2019] [Accepted: 04/26/2019] [Indexed: 01/27/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- I Macpherson
- Department of Humanities, International University of Catalonia, Barcelona, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
55
|
Kennett D. Using genetic genealogy databases in missing persons cases and to develop suspect leads in violent crimes. Forensic Sci Int 2019; 301:107-117. [DOI: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.05.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/12/2018] [Revised: 05/06/2019] [Accepted: 05/08/2019] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
|
56
|
Blakemore JK, Voigt P, Schiffman MR, Lee S, Besser AG, Fino ME. Experiences and psychological outcomes of the oocyte donor: a survey of donors post-donation from one center. J Assist Reprod Genet 2019; 36:1999-2005. [PMID: 31300913 DOI: 10.1007/s10815-019-01527-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/27/2019] [Accepted: 07/08/2019] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To assess the experiences and psychological outcomes of oocyte donors from one fertility center. METHODS An anonymous survey was distributed via a secure email to 161 donors who underwent oocyte donation-anonymous, directed/known, and recruited agency-between January 2008 and January 2019 at the NYU Langone Fertility Center. RESULTS Thirty-six donors completed the survey with the majority between 2 and 10 years since donation. Respondents reported a high prevalence of psychiatric symptoms or diagnoses post-donation. The majority of donors reported positive thoughts and feelings toward their donation process as well as to the knowledge of children born from their donation. Negative comments about donation were in the minority but focused on unexpected aspects about the process or outcome. Based on qualitative analysis, thoughts about family or "family-oriented thoughts" were the most frequent theme in respondent comments. 62.5% of respondents reporting that they would be open to identity-disclosure or open donation after experiencing the process. CONCLUSIONS Despite a high reported prevalence of psychiatric symptoms, the majority of respondents felt positively about the donation experience as well as the prospect of open donation or identity-disclosure post-donation. Further research on long-term psychological outcomes, related to all aspects of donation, is important as the counseling and informed consent of oocyte donors continues to evolve. These data will be particularly important with regard to the aspect of disclosure, both planned and unplanned, in the modern era of electronic information sharing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer K Blakemore
- NYU Langone Fertility Center, NYU Langone Health, 660 First Avenue, 5th Floor, New York, NY, 10016, USA.
| | - Paxton Voigt
- NYU Langone School of Medicine, 550 First Avenue, New York, 10016, NY, USA
| | - Mindy R Schiffman
- NYU Langone Fertility Center, NYU Langone Health, 660 First Avenue, 5th Floor, New York, NY, 10016, USA
| | - Shelley Lee
- NYU Langone Fertility Center, NYU Langone Health, 660 First Avenue, 5th Floor, New York, NY, 10016, USA
| | - Andria G Besser
- NYU Langone Fertility Center, NYU Langone Health, 660 First Avenue, 5th Floor, New York, NY, 10016, USA
| | - M Elizabeth Fino
- NYU Langone Fertility Center, NYU Langone Health, 660 First Avenue, 5th Floor, New York, NY, 10016, USA
| |
Collapse
|
57
|
Pasch LA. New realities for the practice of egg donation: a family-building perspective. Fertil Steril 2019; 110:1194-1202. [PMID: 30503105 DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.08.055] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/04/2018] [Revised: 08/24/2018] [Accepted: 08/29/2018] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
Abstract
The practice of egg donation in the United States has been based on assumptions about secrecy, anonymity, and contact among the parties that require reexamination. This article argues for the need to acknowledge that secrecy and anonymity are no longer viable assumptions and that all parties may have a strong interest in contact and connection. A shift in the narrative for the practice of egg donation from a purely medical perspective to a broader family-building perspective is described. Significant practice changes to accommodate the new realities, rooted in a family-building perspective, are outlined in the arenas of medical record retention, informed consent, recipient and donor preparation and counseling, facilitation of contact among the parties, and outreach to other medical professionals, with the goal of promoting not only healthy pregnancy, but also long-term positive family functioning.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lauri A Pasch
- Departments of Psychiatry and Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Science, University of California, San Francisco, California.
| |
Collapse
|
58
|
Pennings G. Genetic databases and the future of donor anonymity. Hum Reprod 2019; 34:786-790. [DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dez029] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/15/2018] [Revised: 02/03/2019] [Accepted: 02/15/2019] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Guido Pennings
- Department of Philosophy and Moral Science, Bioethics Institute Ghent, Ghent University, Blandijnberg 2, Gent, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
59
|
Simopoulou M, Sfakianoudis K, Giannelou P, Pierouli A, Rapani A, Maziotis E, Galatis D, Bakas P, Vlahos N, Pantos K, Koutsilieris M. Treating Infertility: Current Affairs of Cross-border Reproductive Care. Open Med (Wars) 2019; 14:292-299. [PMID: 30931395 PMCID: PMC6434662 DOI: 10.1515/med-2019-0026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2018] [Accepted: 01/17/2019] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Infertility patients are willing to travel abroad to receive the medical treatment of choice. A 2010 study reported that approximately 25,000 couples travel abroad annually seeking infertility treatment. The purpose of this review is to analyze the criteria and risks related to cross-border reproductive care (CBRC) from the perspective of the patients and explore the issues raised regarding the country of origin and the destination country. A computerized search was performed in PubMed employing respective keywords. The total number of published articles provided by our PubMed search was 1905. Criteria for selecting the destination country include: the economic status, legislation, quality of care and anonymity. Despite the fact that CBRC is becoming a familiar concept, it raises concerns for the practitioner and issues of a social and bioethical nature. Most of them stem from the fact that health care acquires a commercialization aspect. Medical tourism entails several risks, such as misconceptions regarding the destination country, and legal issues arising from differences in the judiciary systems. Larger studies evaluating all aspects of CBRC are imperative. Quality assurance, a consensus and a common platform of practice, along with a system of international governance based on human rights, are a necessity for CBRC patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mara Simopoulou
- Department of Physiology, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 75, Mikras Asias, 11527, Athens, Greece.,Assisted Conception Unit, 2nd Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Aretaieion Hospital, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | | | - Polina Giannelou
- Department of Physiology, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.,Centre for Human Reproduction, Genesis Athens Clinic, Athens, Greece
| | - Aikaterini Pierouli
- Department of Physiology, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | - Anna Rapani
- Department of Physiology, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | - Evangelos Maziotis
- Department of Physiology, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | - Dionysios Galatis
- Department of Physiology, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | - Panagiotis Bakas
- Assisted Conception Unit, 2nd Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Aretaieion Hospital, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | - Nikolaos Vlahos
- Assisted Conception Unit, 2nd Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Aretaieion Hospital, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | | | - Michael Koutsilieris
- Department of Physiology, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| |
Collapse
|
60
|
Nordqvist P. Un/familiar connections: on the relevance of a sociology of personal life for exploring egg and sperm donation. SOCIOLOGY OF HEALTH & ILLNESS 2019; 41:601-615. [PMID: 30801732 PMCID: PMC6850007 DOI: 10.1111/1467-9566.12862] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
Abstract
In recent decades, reproductive medicine has become a widespread global phenomenon. Within the field, donor conception, and the use of donated eggs, sperm or embryos from a third party, plays a key role. Despite the importance of those individuals who donate, there has been scant research exploring their experiences. Seeking to contribute to the growing, albeit still small, body of research on donors, this paper advocates bringing the process of donating into dialogue with a sociology of personal life. It suggests that important new insights about the donor experience can be achieved by utilising such a theoretical perspective. The paper applies a broad framework of a sociology of personal life to demonstrate that the decision to donate reverberates within donors' everyday lives and relationships, and explores, primarily theoretically, how it is that acts of donation bring such issues into play. To this end, the paper examines in detail three ways in which donating interacts with dimensions that are integral to personal life: "living" genetic connectedness, relationality and the intimate body. Ultimately, the paper suggests that a sociology of personal life shows light on new, unexplored questions for this field that demand greater scholarly attention.
Collapse
|
61
|
Hershberger PE, Driessnack M, Kavanaugh K, Klock SC. Oocyte donation disclosure decisions: a longitudinal follow-up at middle childhood. HUM FERTIL 2019; 24:31-45. [PMID: 30724630 DOI: 10.1080/14647273.2019.1567945] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
Abstract
Few studies have captured oocyte donation (OD) parents' decision processes about intended and actual disclosure over time. Likewise, OD children's perceptions about their family composition during middle childhood are underexplored. To address these gaps, a longitudinally followed cohort of OD recipient families was invited to participate in a qualitative, follow-up study. With an 86% response rate after 12 years, families were composed of oocyte recipient mothers (n = 6) and biological fathers (n = 6) representing 12 donor-oocyte conceived children (10.33 ± 1.23 years; mean ± SD). Of the 12 children, two that were aware and two that were unaware of their conceptual origins completed conversational interviews. Only one family in the initial cohort had disclosed OD to their children by the 12-year follow-up, despite 43% of parents intending to disclose and another 43% undecided about disclosure during pregnancy. Four parental disclosure patterns emerged at 12 years: (i) wanting to disclose; (ii) conflicted about disclosure; (iii) not planning to disclose; and (iv) having disclosed. Children that were unaware of their conceptual origins displayed no knowledge of their method of conception. There is a need for family-centric interventions to assist 'wanting to disclose' parents in their disclosure process and 'conflicted about disclosure' parents in their decision-making process post-OD treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Patricia E Hershberger
- Department of Health Systems Science, College of Nursing, Chicago, IL, USA.,Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, College of Medicine, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Martha Driessnack
- School of Nursing, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA
| | - Karen Kavanaugh
- Department of Nursing Research, Children's Hospital of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA
| | - Susan C Klock
- Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA
| |
Collapse
|
62
|
Bolt S, Postema D, van der Heij A, B M Maas AJ. Anonymous Dutch sperm donors releasing their identity. HUM FERTIL 2019; 24:24-30. [PMID: 30652500 DOI: 10.1080/14647273.2018.1564156] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
Abstract
This study examined the motivations of anonymous Dutch sperm donors to release their identity. It aimed to increase knowledge and encourage donors to become identifiable through a more informed decision, allowing more donor-conceived persons to contact their donors. Since 2010, anonymous sperm donors in the Netherlands can register in the Fiom KID-DNA Database developed by Fiom and Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital (CWZ). An online survey was sent to donors who registered in the database (May 2015-August 2017). A total of 179 male respondents participated in this study. The motives of most donors to register in the database were child-oriented: donors believe that their offspring are entitled to their physical and social details and/or they want to give their offspring the chance to contact them. Other motives are donor-oriented, such as the curiosity about the number of offspring, their well-being and the desire to establish contact. This research showed that, to encourage anonymous donors to release their identity, one should focus on providing information about the existence of DNA databases. As well as increasing the donor's awareness of problems donor-conceived persons can experience by the lack of knowledge about their descent, answering questions and concerns from donors, and exploring the curiosity about their offspring.
Collapse
|
63
|
Tsui EYL, Cheng JOY. The living experience of losing genetic continuity: Concealment tendency in Chinese recipients of donor-assisted conception. J Health Psychol 2019; 26:525-542. [PMID: 30618294 DOI: 10.1177/1359105318820667] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
This study explored how Chinese women with donor-assisted conception experienced loss of genetic continuity and managed donor-assisted conception-related information. Through Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis, a thematic framework on women's beliefs, motivation, and behaviors in information management was constructed. Contrary to the Western trend toward disclosure, it was found that Chinese women strongly preferred to conceal, in order to protect their family members, the parent-child relationship, and family stability. Participants' strong preference was also indicated in specific behaviors that ensure information concealment. The findings of this study may contribute toward the development of culturally sensitive clinical guidelines for counseling practice that supports infertile couples' decision-making.
Collapse
|
64
|
Silva SPD, Freitas CD, Baía I, Samorinha C, Machado H, Silva S. Doação de gametas: questões sociais e éticas (não) respondidas em Portugal. CAD SAUDE PUBLICA 2019; 35:e00122918. [DOI: 10.1590/0102-311x00122918] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/21/2018] [Accepted: 10/25/2018] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Resumo: Conhecer a discussão em torno dos desafios sociais e éticos da doação de gametas é fundamental para a boa governança das técnicas de reprodução assistida. Neste artigo, analisam-se os tópicos que orientaram o debate nas organizações de ética portuguesas, discutindo as suas conexões com os temas abordados internacionalmente. Para tal, em março de 2018, pesquisamos sistematicamente os websites do Conselho Nacional de Procriação Medicamente Assistida e do Conselho Nacional de Ética para as Ciências da Vida. Procedemos à análise de conteúdo temática de 25 documentos. Os resultados indicam que o debate se centrou na acessibilidade, no anonimato e na compensação de doadores e, em menor extensão, nas responsabilidades profissionais. Observaram-se posicionamentos heterogêneos e tensões entre múltiplos direitos e princípios éticos associados a receptores, a pessoas nascidas com recurso à doação de gametas e a doadores. Esses têm em comum três alegações: a escassez de evidência científica; as experiências de outros países; e regulamentações oriundas de entidades internacionais. Na literatura abordam-se tópicos adicionais, nomeadamente: uma via dupla que conjugue anonimato/identificação de doadores; implementação de sistemas de registo reprodutivo para receptores e doadores; limites do rastreio genético a doadores; doação por familiares/conhecidos; e o papel dos doadores na decisão quanto ao destino de embriões criopreservados e na escolha das características dos receptores dos seus gametas. Há espaço para expandir o debate e promover a pesquisa em torno das implicações sociais e éticas da doação de gametas, considerando a participação de todos os cidadãos.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Cláudia De Freitas
- Universidade do Porto, Portugal; Universidade do Porto, Portugal; ISCT-Instituto Universitário de Lisboa, Portugal
| | - Inês Baía
- Universidade do Porto, Portugal; Universidade do Porto, Portugal
| | | | | | - Susana Silva
- Universidade do Porto, Portugal; Universidade do Porto, Portugal
| |
Collapse
|
65
|
|
66
|
de Melo-Martín I, Rubin LR, Cholst IN. "I want us to be a normal family": Toward an understanding of the functions of anonymity among U.S. oocyte donors and recipients. AJOB Empir Bioeth 2018; 9:235-251. [PMID: 30398412 DOI: 10.1080/23294515.2018.1528308] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/14/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Anonymity remains the more common practice in gamete donations, but legislation prohibiting anonymity with a goal of protecting donor-conceived children's right to know their genetic origins is becoming more common. However, given the dearth of research investigating the function of anonymity for donors and recipients, it is unclear whether these policies will accomplish their goals. The aim of this study was to explore experiences with anonymity among oocyte donors and recipients who participated in an anonymous donor oocyte program and to understand the ways in which anonymity functions for them. METHODS Semistructured interviews were conducted with 50 women: 28 oocyte donors and 22 recipients who were recruited from an academic center for reproductive medicine in the United States. RESULTS Donors and recipients view anonymity both as a mechanism to protect the interests of all parties (recipients, donors, and donor-conceived children) and as a point of conflict. Specifically, three key areas were identified where both donors and recipients saw anonymity as having an important role: relieving anxieties about family structures and obligations; protecting their interests and those of donor-conceived children (while acknowledging where interests conflict); and managing the future. CONCLUSION As gamete donation increasingly moves away from the practice of anonymity, examining why anonymity matters to stakeholders will be helpful in devising strategies to successfully implement identity-release options.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Lisa R Rubin
- b Department of Psychology , New School for Social Research
| | - Ina N Cholst
- c The Ronald O. Perelman and Claudia Cohen Center for Reproductive Medicine , Weill Cornell Medical College
| |
Collapse
|
67
|
Tulay P, Atılan O. Oocyte donors’ awareness on donation procedure and risks: A call for developing guidelines for health tourism in oocyte donation programmes. J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc 2018; 20:236-242. [PMID: 30299264 PMCID: PMC6883756 DOI: 10.4274/jtgga.galenos.2018.2018.0110] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/01/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective In the recent years, oocyte donation programmes have widely spread worldwide becoming the drive of health tourism. In some countries, donation programmes are tightly regulated, whereas in others, the guidelines or regulations are not well defined. To evaluate donors’ awareness of the donation programmes and the ethical consequences in enrolling these programmes. Material and Methods A detailed questionnaire-based survey was conducted to evaluate the donors’ main drive to get involved in the donation programme and the donor’s knowledge and awareness of risk factors. Results The majority of the donors (70%) were undergoing donation programmes for financial gains through compensation. The donors were especially not aware of the long-term medical risks and the possibility of identity exposure through genetic screening. Conclusion The main duty of health professionals is to counsel donors about the basic procedures and any possible problems they may face during the donation programmes. Reimbursement of oocyte donors is a slippery slope in oocyte donation programmes. High compensation may make women think that donation is a profession without considering possible risks. Furthermore, with the wider use of direct-to-consumer genetic testing, and genetic anonymity may be at risk, thus the donors have to be counselled properly. Therefore, in this era of health tourism, it is crucial to set up well-defined counselling bodies in all oocyte donation centres and enable donors to make an informed choice in becoming oocyte donors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pınar Tulay
- Department of Medical Genetics, Near East University Faculty of Medicine, Nicosia, Cyprus,Near East University, Research Centre of Experimental Health Sciences, Nicosia, Cyprus
| | - Okan Atılan
- Department of Medical Biology and Genetics, Near East University Institute of Health Sciences, Nicosia, Cyprus
| |
Collapse
|
68
|
Informing offspring of their conception by gamete or embryo donation: an Ethics Committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2018; 109:601-605. [DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.01.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/28/2017] [Accepted: 01/03/2018] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
|
69
|
Abstract
Screening for genetic disorders began in 1963 with the initiation of newborn screening for phenylketonuria. Advances in molecular technology have made both newborn screening for newborns affected with serious disorders, and carrier screening of individuals at risk for offspring with genetic disorders, more complex and more widely available. Carrier screening today can be performed secondary to family history-based screening, ethnic-based screening, and expanded carrier screening (ECS). ECS is panel-based screening, which analyzes carrier status for hundreds of genetic disorders irrespective of patient race or ethnicity. In this article, we review the historical and current aspects of carrier screening for single gene disorders, including future research directions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nancy C Rose
- Intermountain Healthcare, University of Utah Health Sciences, Intermountain Medical Center, Maternal Fetal Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
| | | |
Collapse
|
70
|
Kalampalikis N, Doumergue M, Zadeh S. Sperm donor regulation and disclosure intentions: Results from a nationwide multi-centre study in France. REPRODUCTIVE BIOMEDICINE & SOCIETY ONLINE 2018; 5:38-45. [PMID: 29774274 PMCID: PMC5952651 DOI: 10.1016/j.rbms.2018.02.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/02/2017] [Revised: 11/30/2017] [Accepted: 02/12/2018] [Indexed: 05/11/2023]
Abstract
Gamete donation in Europe is not regulated by a common legal framework. Different laws regarding donor anonymity and remuneration exist in different countries. In France, gamete donation is characterized by a stable legal framework - the existing system of anonymous and non-remunerated donation remained unchanged following a period of public and parliamentary debate in 2011 - but little evidence is available concerning recipients' views and experiences of gamete donation. This article describes findings from a questionnaire completed individually by 714 heterosexual couple members undergoing a donor conception procedure at one of 20 national fertility centres in France. Participants were invited to report their attitudes towards the French legal framework, their perceptions of the anonymous donor, and their intentions to disclose donor conception to their child and to other people. The majority of respondents (93%) approved of the current legal framework. Participants indicated that they thought about the sperm donor in ways that emphasized his act of donation without describing him as a specific individual. A majority (71%) also stated that they intended to tell their child about their donor conception. Given that this is the largest nationwide study of French recipients of donor sperm, the findings make an important contribution to the research evidence currently available about prospective parents' perspectives in the increasingly uncommon context of donor anonymity in Europe.
Collapse
|
71
|
Harper JC, Aittomäki K, Borry P, Cornel MC, de Wert G, Dondorp W, Geraedts J, Gianaroli L, Ketterson K, Liebaers I, Lundin K, Mertes H, Morris M, Pennings G, Sermon K, Spits C, Soini S, van Montfoort APA, Veiga A, Vermeesch JR, Viville S, Macek M. Recent developments in genetics and medically assisted reproduction: from research to clinical applications. Eur J Hum Genet 2018; 26:12-33. [PMID: 29199274 PMCID: PMC5839000 DOI: 10.1038/s41431-017-0016-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 55] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/23/2017] [Accepted: 09/14/2017] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Two leading European professional societies, the European Society of Human Genetics and the European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology, have worked together since 2004 to evaluate the impact of fast research advances at the interface of assisted reproduction and genetics, including their application into clinical practice. In September 2016, the expert panel met for the third time. The topics discussed highlighted important issues covering the impacts of expanded carrier screening, direct-to-consumer genetic testing, voiding of the presumed anonymity of gamete donors by advanced genetic testing, advances in the research of genetic causes underlying male and female infertility, utilisation of massively parallel sequencing in preimplantation genetic testing and non-invasive prenatal screening, mitochondrial replacement in human oocytes, and additionally, issues related to cross-generational epigenetic inheritance following IVF and germline genome editing. The resulting paper represents a consensus of both professional societies involved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J C Harper
- Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - K Aittomäki
- Laboratory of Genetics, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland
| | - P Borry
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - M C Cornel
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Section Community Genetics, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - G de Wert
- Department of Health, Ethics and Society, Research Schools CAPHRI and GROW, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - W Dondorp
- Department of Health, Ethics and Society, Research Schools CAPHRI and GROW, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - J Geraedts
- Department Genetics and Cell Biology, GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - L Gianaroli
- S.I.S.Me.R. Reproductive Medicine Unit, Bologna, Italy
| | | | - I Liebaers
- Center for Medical Genetics, UZ Brussels, Brussels, Belgium
- Research Group Reproduction and Genetics, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium
| | - K Lundin
- Reproductive Medicine, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden
| | - H Mertes
- Bioethics Institute Ghent, Department of Philosophy and Moral Science, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | - M Morris
- Synlab Genetics, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - G Pennings
- Bioethics Institute Ghent, Department of Philosophy and Moral Science, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | - K Sermon
- Research Group Reproduction and Genetics, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium
| | - C Spits
- Research Group Reproduction and Genetics, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium
| | - S Soini
- Helsinki Biobank, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Helsinki, Finland
| | - A P A van Montfoort
- IVF Laboratory, Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - A Veiga
- Barcelona Stem Cell Bank, Centre of Regenerative Medicine in Barcelona, Hospital Duran i Reynals, Barcelona, Spain
- Reproductive Medicine Service of Dexeus Woman Health, Barcelona, Spain
| | - J R Vermeesch
- Department of Human Genetics, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - S Viville
- Institute of Parasitology and Pathology, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France
- Laboratory of Genetic Diagnostics, UF3472-Genetics of Infertility, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, Strasbourg, France
| | - M Macek
- Department of Biology and Medical Genetics, Charles University-2nd Faculty of Medicine and Motol University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic.
| |
Collapse
|
72
|
Harper JC, Aittomäki K, Borry P, Cornel MC, de Wert G, Dondorp W, Geraedts J, Gianaroli L, Ketterson K, Liebaers I, Lundin K, Mertes H, Morris M, Pennings G, Sermon K, Spits C, Soini S, van Montfoort APA, Veiga A, Vermeesch JR, Viville S, Macek M. Recent developments in genetics and medically-assisted reproduction: from research to clinical applications †‡. Hum Reprod Open 2017; 2017:hox015. [PMID: 31486804 PMCID: PMC6276693 DOI: 10.1093/hropen/hox015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/08/2017] [Accepted: 11/14/2017] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Two leading European professional societies, the European Society of Human Genetics and the European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology, have worked together since 2004 to evaluate the impact of fast research advances at the interface of assisted reproduction and genetics, including their application into clinical practice. In September 2016, the expert panel met for the third time. The topics discussed highlighted important issues covering the impacts of expanded carrier screening, direct-to-consumer genetic testing, voiding of the presumed anonymity of gamete donors by advanced genetic testing, advances in the research of genetic causes underlying male and female infertility, utilisation of massively-parallel sequencing in preimplantation genetic testing and non-invasive prenatal screening, mitochondrial replacement in human oocytes, and additionally, issues related to cross-generational epigenetic inheritance following IVF and germline genome editing. The resulting paper represents a consensus of both professional societies involved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J C Harper
- Institute for Women's Health, University College London, 86-96 Chenies Mews, London WC1E 6HX, UK
| | - K Aittomäki
- Laboratory of Genetics, Helsinki University Hospital, PO Box 720, FI-00029, Helsinki, Finland
| | - P Borry
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 35 - Box 7001. B-3000, Leuven Belgium
| | - M C Cornel
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, VU University Medical Center, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - G de Wert
- Department of Health, Ethics and Society, Research Schools CAPHRI and GROW, Maastricht University, De Byeplein 1, 6229 HA Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - W Dondorp
- Department of Health, Ethics and Society, Research Schools CAPHRI and GROW, Maastricht University, De Byeplein 1, 6229 HA Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - J Geraedts
- Department Genetics and Cell Biology, GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - L Gianaroli
- S.I.S.Me.R. Reproductive Medicine Unit, Via Mazzini 12, 40138 Bologna, Italy
| | - K Ketterson
- Althea Science, Inc., 3 Regent St #301, Livingston, NJ 07039, USA
| | - I Liebaers
- Centre for Medical Genetics, UZ Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 101, B-1090 Brussels, Belgium
- Research Group Reproduction and Genetics, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 101, B-1090, Brussels, Belgium
| | - K Lundin
- Reproductive Medicine, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Blå Stråket 6, 413 45, Göteborg, Sweden
| | - H Mertes
- Bioethics Institute Ghent, Department of Philosophy and Moral Science, Ghent University, Belgium
| | - M Morris
- Synlab Genetics, chemin d'Entre-Bois 21, CH-1018, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - G Pennings
- Bioethics Institute Ghent, Department of Philosophy and Moral Science, Ghent University, Belgium
| | - K Sermon
- Research Group Reproduction and Genetics, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 101, B-1090, Brussels, Belgium
| | - C Spits
- Research Group Reproduction and Genetics, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Laarbeeklaan 101, B-1090, Brussels, Belgium
| | - S Soini
- Helsinki Biobank, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Haartmaninkatu 3, PO Box 400, 00029 HUS, Helsinki, Finland
| | - A P A van Montfoort
- IVF laboratory, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Maastricht University Medical Center, PO Box 5800, 6202 AZ Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - A Veiga
- Barcelona Stem Cell Bank, Centre of Regenerative Medicine in Barcelona, Hospital Duran i Reynals, Gran Via de l' Hospitalet 199, 08908, Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
- Reproductive Medicine Service of Dexeus Woman Health, Gran Via Carles III, 71-75 - 08028 Barcelona, Spain
| | - J R Vermeesch
- Department of Human Genetics, KU Leuven, O&N I Herestraat 49 - Box 602, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium
| | - S Viville
- Institute of Parasitology and Pathology, University of Strasbourg, 3 rue Koberlé, 67000 Strasbourg, France
- Laboratory of Genetic Diagnostics, UF3472-Genetics of Infertility, Nouvel Hôpital Civil, 1 place de l'Hôpital, 67091 Strasbourg cedex, France
| | - M Macek
- Department of Biology and Medical Genetics, Charles University 2nd Faculty of Medicine and Motol University Hospital, V Úvalu 84, Prague CZ-15006, Czech Republic
| |
Collapse
|
73
|
Vaz-de-Macedo C, Harper J. A closer look at expanded carrier screening from a PGD perspective. Hum Reprod 2017; 32:1951-1956. [DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dex272] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/12/2016] [Accepted: 08/12/2017] [Indexed: 01/28/2023] Open
|
74
|
Searching for ‘relations’ using a DNA linking register by adults conceived following sperm donation. BIOSOCIETIES 2017. [DOI: 10.1057/s41292-017-0063-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
|
75
|
Crawshaw M. Direct-to-consumer DNA testing: the fallout for individuals and their families unexpectedly learning of their donor conception origins. HUM FERTIL 2017; 21:225-228. [DOI: 10.1080/14647273.2017.1339127] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/30/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Marilyn Crawshaw
- Department of Social Policy and Social Work, University of York, York, UK
| |
Collapse
|
76
|
Crawshaw M, Adams D, Allan S, Blyth E, Bourne K, Brügge C, Chien A, Clissa A, Daniels K, Glazer E, Haase J, Hammarberg K, van Hooff H, Hunt J, Indekeu A, Johnson L, Kim Y, Kirkman M, Kramer W, Lalos A, Lister C, Lowinger P, Mindes E, Monach J, Montuschi O, Pike S, Powell V, Rodino I, Ruby A, Margriet Schrijvers A, Semba Y, Shidlo R, Thorn P, Tonkin L, Visser M, Woodward J, Wischmann T, Yee S, Zweifel JE. Disclosure and donor-conceived children. Hum Reprod 2017; 32:1535-1536. [PMID: 28549124 DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dex107] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 05/08/2017] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Marilyn Crawshaw
- Department of Social Policy & Social Work, University of York,York YO10 5DD, UK
| | - Damian Adams
- School of Nursing and Midwifery, Flinders University, Sturt Road, Bedford Park 5042, South Australia, Australia
| | - Sonia Allan
- Deakin Law School, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Eric Blyth
- School of Human and Health Sciences, University of Huddersfield, Queensgate, Huddersfield HD1 3DH, UK
| | - Kate Bourne
- ANZICA (Australian and New Zealand Infertility Counsellors Association) & Victorian Assisted Reproductive Treatment Authority, Level 30/570 Bourke St., Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia
| | - Claudia Brügge
- DI-Netz e.V. - Deutsche Vereinigung von Familien nach Samenspende, Turnerstr. 49, 33602 Bielefeld, Germany
| | - Anne Chien
- British Infertility Counselling Association (BICA), Assisted Conception Unit, Ninewells Hospital, Dundee DD1 9SY, Scotland
| | | | - Ken Daniels
- Department of Human Services and Social Work, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch 8140, Aotearoa/New Zealand
| | | | - Jean Haase
- Private practice, London, Ontario, Canada N6K 4Z7
| | - Karin Hammarberg
- Jean Hailes Research Unit, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Level 4, 553 St. Kilda Road, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia
| | | | | | - Astrid Indekeu
- Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Huddinge, Sweden/Centre for Sociological Research, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Louise Johnson
- Victorian Assisted Reproductive Treatment Authority, Level 30/570 Bourke St., Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia
| | - Young Kim
- The Women's Care Program, Victoria Hospital, Room E3-620B, Zone E, 800 Commissioners Road East, PO Box 5010, London, Ontario, Canada N6A 5W9
| | - Maggie Kirkman
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia
| | - Wendy Kramer
- Donor Sibling Registry, PO Box 1571, Nederland, Colorado 804666, USA
| | - Ann Lalos
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden
| | - Charles Lister
- National Gamete Donation Trust, Mutfords, Hare St., Buntingford, Hertfordshire SG9 0ED, UK
| | | | - Erica Mindes
- Covington and Hafkin & Associates, Richmond, VA, USA
| | | | | | | | - Victoria Powell
- Department of Internal Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MS, USA
| | - Iolanda Rodino
- Concept Fertility Centre, 218 Nicholson Road, Subiaco, Western Australia, Australia
| | - Alice Ruby
- The Sperm Bank of California, Berkeley, CA 94704, USA
| | - Anne Margriet Schrijvers
- Center for Reproductive Medicine, Academic Medical Center/University of Amsterdam Q4-123, Meibergdreef 19, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Yukari Semba
- Institute for Gender Studies, Ochanomizu University, 2-1-1 Otsuka, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 112-8610, Japan
| | - Ruth Shidlo
- Shorashim: Israeli Donor Families, 47/3 Tagore St., Tel Aviv 6920346, Israel
| | - Petra Thorn
- German Society for Fertility Counselling, Private practice, Langener Str. 37, 64546 Moerfelden, Germany
| | - Lois Tonkin
- College of Education, Health & Human Development, Doverdale Campus, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch 8140, Aotearoa/New Zealand
| | - Marja Visser
- Center for Reproductive Medicine, Academic Medical Center/ University of Amsterdam Q4-123, Meibergdreef 19, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Julia Woodward
- Psychological Services Program, Duke Fertility Center, Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Duke University Health System, 5704 Fayetteville Road, Durham, NC 27713, USA
| | - Tewes Wischmann
- Institute of Medical Psychology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Samantha Yee
- Ontario College of Social Workers and Social Services Workers, CReATe Fertility Centre, 790 Bay Street, Suite 1002, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1N8, Canada
| | - Julianne E Zweifel
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, 2365 Deming Way, Madison, WI 53562, USA
| |
Collapse
|
77
|
Pasch LA, Benward J, Scheib JE, Woodward JT. Donor-conceived children: the view ahead. Hum Reprod 2017; 32:1534. [PMID: 28541418 DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dex105] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/17/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Lauri A Pasch
- Departments of Psychiatry and Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, 499 Illinois St 6th floor, San Francisco, CA 94158,USA
| | - Jean Benward
- Private Practice, 18 Crow Canyon Ct Ste 305, San Ramon, CA 94583,USA
| | - Joanna E Scheib
- Psychology Department, University of California, Davis, 267A Young Hall, Davis, CA 95616, USA.,The Sperm Bank of California, 2115 Milvia St # 2, Berkeley, CA 94704, USA
| | - Julia T Woodward
- Departments of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences and Obstetrics and Gynecology, Duke University, 5704 Fayetteville Road, Durham, NC 27713, USA
| |
Collapse
|
78
|
Moray N, Pink KE, Borry P, Larmuseau MHD. Paternity testing under the cloak of recreational genetics. Eur J Hum Genet 2017; 25:768-770. [PMID: 28272533 PMCID: PMC5477360 DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2017.31] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/10/2016] [Revised: 02/01/2017] [Accepted: 02/07/2017] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
Direct-to-consumer (DTC) internet companies are selling widely advertised and highly popular genetic ancestry tests to the broad public. These tests are often classified as falling within the scope of so-called 'recreational genetics', but little is known about the impact of using these services. In this study, a particular focus is whether minors (and under what conditions) should be able to participate in the use of these DTC tests. Current ancestry tests are easily able to reveal whether participants are related and can, therefore, also reveal misattributed paternity, with implications for the minors and adults involved in the testing. We analysed the publicly available privacy policies and terms of services of 43 DTC genetic ancestry companies to assess whether minors are able to participate in testing DTC genetic ancestry, and also whether and how companies ethically account for the potential of paternity inference. Our results indicated that the majority of DTC genetic ancestry testing companies do not specifically address whether minors are able to participate in testing. Furthermore, the majority of the policies and terms of services fail to mention the vulnerability of minors and family members in receiving unexpected information, in particular, in relation to (misattributed) paternity. Therefore, recreational genetics carries both the risk of unintentionally revealing misidentified paternity, and also the risk that fathers will deliberately use these services to test their children's paternity without revealing their intentions to the mother or any other third party.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nathalie Moray
- Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- AZ Maria Middelares, Gent, Belgium
| | - Katherina E Pink
- Family and Population Studies, Centre of Sociological Research, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- Faculty of Life Sciences, Department of Anthropology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Pascal Borry
- Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- Leuven Institute for Genomics and Society (LIGAS), KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Maarten HD Larmuseau
- Leuven Institute for Genomics and Society (LIGAS), KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- Forensic Biomedical Sciences, Department of Imaging and Pathology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
79
|
Harper J, Jackson E, Spoelstra-Witjens L, Reisel D. Using an introduction website to start a family: implications for users and health practitioners. REPRODUCTIVE BIOMEDICINE & SOCIETY ONLINE 2017; 4:13-17. [PMID: 29796427 PMCID: PMC5957093 DOI: 10.1016/j.rbms.2017.02.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/10/2016] [Revised: 01/09/2017] [Accepted: 02/27/2017] [Indexed: 05/25/2023]
Abstract
Donor insemination treatment offered in licensed clinics protects the donor, recipient and offspring both medically and legally. The Internet has opened up novel, unregulated ways of donating sperm through 'introduction websites' and social media forums. Broadly, three categories of women use introduction websites: those who want to have a child with no further involvement of the donor; those who wish to know the identity of the donor from the start; and those who intend to electively co-parent, that is, to bring up the child together with the donor/father. Donors may choose to donate through introduction websites for altruistic reasons and/or in order to have greater involvement with the child. There are some donors who are motivated by the prospect of a sexual encounter, advertising their preference for 'natural insemination' - i.e. via sexual intercourse or partial intercourse. When people make their own arrangements online, they may do so in the absence of clear, accurate information. This article, sets out some of the issues that recipients and donors ought to consider before embarking on unregulated sperm donation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joyce Harper
- Embryology, IVF and Reproductive Genetics Group, Institute for Women’s Health, University College London
| | - Emily Jackson
- Law Department, London School of Economics and Political Science
| | | | - Dan Reisel
- Centre for Ethics in Women’s Health, Institute for Women’s Health, University College London
| |
Collapse
|
80
|
Wilson TL. Unravelling orders in a borderless Europe? Cross-border reproductive care and the paradoxes of assisted reproductive technology policy in Germany and Poland. REPRODUCTIVE BIOMEDICINE & SOCIETY ONLINE 2016; 3:48-59. [PMID: 29774250 PMCID: PMC5952659 DOI: 10.1016/j.rbms.2017.02.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2015] [Revised: 11/21/2016] [Accepted: 02/27/2017] [Indexed: 06/08/2023]
Abstract
This article examines assisted reproduction policy and practices in Germany and Poland. Germany is among the most restrictive countries in the European Union (EU) with respect to assisted reproductive technologies. In contrast, Poland only recently passed legislation regulating assisted reproductive technologies. Before this, most practices were unregulated, despite vocal opposition to all forms of IVF from conservative Roman Catholic activists. Germany and Poland differ significantly regarding the cultural narratives and historical experience that impact attitudes toward reproduction. In Germany, discussions on assisted reproduction often invoke concerns about medical intervention in ethically complex matters, due - in part - to the country's National Socialist past. My objectives in this article centre on examining assisted reproduction contexts in each of these two countries, with attention to the framing of debates on reproduction, the anxieties that inform them, and the resulting paradoxes. I consider the unintended consequences of domestic policy and their importance regarding cross-border reproductive care (CBRC). Within the borderless EU, the widespread practice of CBRC demonstrates the ineffectiveness of national policies. Moreover, this shift in location can impact practices and trends found in other accessible, but less restrictive countries. Of particular concern are the relocation of risk to 'bioavailable' populations in less affluent countries and the reification of cultural and socio-economic hierarchies.
Collapse
|
81
|
Scheib JE, Ruby A, Benward J. Who requests their sperm donor's identity? The first ten years of information releases to adults with open-identity donors. Fertil Steril 2016; 107:483-493. [PMID: 27887716 DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.10.023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/11/2016] [Revised: 10/15/2016] [Accepted: 10/16/2016] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To report findings from 10 years of requests from adults eligible to obtain their open-identity sperm donor's information. DESIGN Analysis of archived family and donor data. Semistructured interviews at information releases. SETTING Not applicable. PATIENT(S) A total of 85 DI adults requesting 43 donor identities; program data on 256 DI families. INTERVENTION(S) None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S) We identified [1] demographic predictors of requesting donor identities, [2] information release timing and length, and [3] request motives. RESULT(S) Just >35% of eligible DI adults requested their donor's identity. Adults ranged from 18-27 years, requesting at median age 18 years. More women than men requested. Proportionally fewer adults requested when they had heterosexual-couple parents, and proportionally more when they had one rather than two parents. In interviews, the common theme was wanting to know more about the donor, especially about shared characteristics. Most adults planned to contact their donor. More than 94% of adults had donors who were open to contact; adults expressed modest expectations about this contact. CONCLUSION(S) In 2001, the first adults became eligible to obtain their open-identity sperm donor's information. Ten years of identity requests at one program indicates that information about one's donor is important to a significant proportion of these DI adults. Most requested their donor's identity soon after becoming eligible, suggesting some urgency to wanting the information. Interview data highlighted the role of donor information in helping adults better understand themselves and their ancestry. Findings hold important implications for practice and policy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joanna E Scheib
- Department of Psychology, University of California, Davis, California; The Sperm Bank of California, Berkeley, California.
| | - Alice Ruby
- The Sperm Bank of California, Berkeley, California
| | | |
Collapse
|
82
|
The Y chromosome as the most popular marker in genetic genealogy benefits interdisciplinary research. Hum Genet 2016; 136:559-573. [DOI: 10.1007/s00439-016-1740-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 40] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/26/2016] [Accepted: 10/16/2016] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
|
83
|
Blake L, Carone N, Slutsky J, Raffanello E, Ehrhardt AA, Golombok S. Gay father surrogacy families: relationships with surrogates and egg donors and parental disclosure of children's origins. Fertil Steril 2016; 106:1503-1509. [PMID: 27565261 PMCID: PMC5090043 DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.08.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/17/2016] [Revised: 07/20/2016] [Accepted: 08/03/2016] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To study the nature and quality of relationships between gay father families and their surrogates and egg donors and parental disclosure of children's origins. DESIGN Cross-sectional study. SETTING Family homes. PATIENT(S) Parents in 40 gay father families with 3-9-year-old children born through surrogacy. INTERVENTION(S) Administration of a semistructured interview. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S) Relationships between parents, children, surrogates, and egg donors and parental disclosure of children's origins were examined using a semistructured interview. RESULT(S) The majority of fathers were content with the level of contact they had with the surrogate, with those who were discontent wanting more contact. Fathers were more likely to maintain relationships with surrogates than egg donors, and almost all families had started the process of talking to their children about their origins, with the level of detail and children's understanding increasing with the age of the child. CONCLUSION(S) In gay father surrogacy families with young children, relationships between parents, children, surrogates, and egg donors are generally positive.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lucy Blake
- Centre for Family Research, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
| | - Nicola Carone
- Department of Developmental and Social Psychology, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Jenna Slutsky
- Division of Gender, Sexuality, and Health, New York Psychiatric Institute, Columbia University, New York, New York
| | - Elizabeth Raffanello
- Division of Gender, Sexuality, and Health, New York Psychiatric Institute, Columbia University, New York, New York
| | - Anke A Ehrhardt
- Division of Gender, Sexuality, and Health, New York Psychiatric Institute, Columbia University, New York, New York
| | - Susan Golombok
- Centre for Family Research, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
84
|
Zadeh S. Disclosure of donor conception in the era of non-anonymity: safeguarding and promoting the interests of donor-conceived individuals? Hum Reprod 2016; 31:2416-2420. [PMID: 27698073 DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dew240] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/01/2016] [Revised: 08/07/2016] [Accepted: 08/22/2016] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
This article responds to a debate article published in Human Reproduction earlier this year. In that article, the authors suggested that parents should be encouraged to disclose the use of donor gametes to their children given rapid and widespread advances in genetic testing and sequencing. However, there is an urgent need to engage with the assertion that in this context, telling children about their donor conception both safeguards and promotes their interests, particularly if such disclosure is motivated by parents' anxieties about accidental discovery. Disclosure that is motivated by the notion of non-anonymity may also encourage parents to share misinformation about donors and encourage their children to have unrealistic expectations. Fertility professionals must remain mindful of these outcomes when discussing disclosure and the future implications of increasing access to genetic information with both prospective and current parents. It is strongly advised that future discussions about the end of donor anonymity are not conflated with the debate on disclosure.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophie Zadeh
- Centre for Family Research, University of Cambridge, Free School Lane, Cambridge, CB2 3RQ, UK
| |
Collapse
|