Attitude towards reciprocity as a motive for oocyte donation

Student views on recognition and payment options for gamete donation in New Zealand

BACKGROUND

Demand for donor gametes in New Zealand significantly outweighs the number of willing donors. Payment for donation has been suggested as a viable solution to increase the supply and attract more donors in acknowledging the time, effort and inconvenience associated with donation.

AIMS

Internationally, university students are a commonly targeted group for paid gamete donation. This study aims to explore the views of university students in New Zealand to gauge their support and concerns relating to a range of options to recognise donors, including payment.

METHODS

Two hundred and three tertiary students completed a questionnaire exploring their views on various forms of recognition for donation and concerns relating to payment.

RESULTS

Participants indicated the greatest support for reimbursement for expenses directly related to the donation process. Payment constituting explicit financial advantage was regarded least favourably. Participants held concerns that payment would attract people donating for the 'wrong' reasons and lead to donors concealing relevant histories. Further concerns included payment increasing costs for recipients and causing disparities in access to gametes.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study suggest that within a New Zealand context a culture of gift-giving and altruism are strongly held principles towards reproductive donation, including among the student population. This highlights the need to consider alternative strategies to commercial models to overcome donor shortages which are in line with the cultural and legislative context of New Zealand.

We want to feel valued: eggs donors' experiences of donation

Egg donation in New Zealand is identity-release, with donor-conceived individuals having the right to access donors' identifying information at the age of 18. It also allows donors and previously unknown recipients to meet prior to donation. Further, donation is altruistic, although reimbursement of costs is possible. In our previous paper we explored the motivations of 21 egg donors in this context and reported that they are motivated to donate as an act of personal gift-giving to recipients who may become known to them through donation, and that they do not want to be compensated for this financially. In this paper, drawing on in-depth interviews, we report on donors' experiences of the donation process and subsequent to donation. Donors understood their donations to be a significant act, both for the recipients and their families, but also for themselves, particularly given the multiple sacrifices which they willingly made. Donors wished for their gift and their role to be valued and acknowledged through being appreciated, informed, involved and supported by recipients and clinics before, during and after their donations. These findings have implications for clinical practice and care, offering insight into how best to support donors prior and subsequent to donation.

Fertility stakeholders' concerns regarding payment for egg and sperm donation in New Zealand and Australia

New Zealand and Australia are countries which currently prohibit donor payment and require open-identity forms of donation. This study explored the concerns of fertility stakeholders regarding payment which would constitute financial reward for gamete donation, and factors predicting such concerns. A total of 434 participants from across New Zealand and Australia completed an online survey anonymously. Participants included those with infertility and treatment experience, donors, recipients, donor-conceived people and clinic professionals. Results indicated that participants' concerns related to their assumptions about the type of donor motivated by financial reward, and the possibility that, if paid, donors might conceal information relevant to treatment and the donor-conceived person. Furthermore, participants were concerned about increasing recipient costs. Participants with personal experience of infertility held stronger concerns overall. Professionals expressed concerns of clinical relevance, such as the withholding of donor information relevant to treatment outcomes. The lowest levels of concern were expressed in relation to payment devaluing the meaning of human life. Qualitatively, themes highlighted concerns regarding payment enticing the 'wrong' type of donor, increased cost to recipients, and concern about the wellbeing of donor-offspring. Collectively, such concerns must be understood against the New Zealand and Australia open-identity donation context which enables the possibility of contact between donors and offspring. These findings indicate that donor recruitment campaigns need to account for different stakeholder concerns, and consider ways to address donor shortages effectively while remaining compliant with legislative requirements.

Motivations for egg donation to previously unknown recipients: donation as a personal, relational act of giving

Egg donation has becoming increasingly common however there is a shortage of donors in many countries, including New Zealand. Research regarding motivations to donate in the context of New Zealand's open-identity and altruistic donation policy and practice is, thus far, limited. This in-depth qualitative study comprised interviews with 21 women to examine their motivations in donating to recipients previously unknown to them. Donors valued parenthood highly and had become aware of the fertility struggles of other women through their own experiences, those of friends or family, or through online personal accounts or advertising. The ability to select recipients and build a comprehensive picture of them, such as through reading recipient profiles or meeting them in person, as is possible in New Zealand, deepened their identification with recipients and thus their empathy and desire to help. They resisted commercial models, positioning themselves as by nature altruistic and regarding their donations as expressions of solidarity and acts of personal gift-giving to specific others who became known to them through donation. Donation was interpreted as a socially relational process, setting up expectations around relationships and ongoing connection. Such understandings have implications for recruitment as well as ongoing experiences and support needs.

Is It Possible to Expand Oocyte Donors by Decreasing Number of Oocytes for Own Use? Insights From a Large Single-Center Study

BACKGROUND

Currently, in China, only women undergoing in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) cycles can donate oocytes to others, but at least 15 oocytes must be kept for their own treatment. Thus, the aim of this study was to determine whether oocyte donation compromises the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) of donors and whether it is possible to expand oocyte donors' crowd.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study from August 2015 to July 2017 including a total of 2,144 patients, in which 830 IVF-embryo transfer (IVF-ET) patients were eligible for oocyte donation and 1,314 patients met all other oocyte donation criteria but had fewer oocytes retrieved (10-17 oocytes). All 830 patients were advised to donate approximately three to five oocytes to others and were eventually divided into two groups: the oocyte donation group (those who donated) and the control group (those who declined). The basic patient parameters and CLBR, as well as the number of supernumerary embryos after achieving live birth, were compared. These two factors were also compared in all patients (2,144) with oocyte ≥10.

RESULTS

In 830 IVF-ET patients who were eligible for oocyte donation, only the oocyte number was significantly different between two groups, and the donation group had more than the control group (25.49 ± 5.76 vs. 22.88 ± 5.11, respectively; p = 0.09). No significant differences were found between the two groups in other factors. The results indicate that the live birth rate in the donation group was higher than that in the control group (81.31% vs. 82.95%, p = 0.371), without significance. In addition, CLBR can still reach as high as 73% when the oocyte number for own use was 10. Supernumerary embryos also increased as the oocyte number increased in all patients (oocyte ≥10).

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, oocyte donation did not compromise CLBR, and oocyte donation can decrease the waste of embryos. In addition, in patients with 10 oocytes retrieved, the CLBR was still good (73%). Thus, it is possible to expand oocyte donors if the number of oocyte kept for own use was decreased from 15 to 10 after enough communication with patients.

[Comparative survey of French oocyte donor's profile and motivations between nulliparous and multiparous donors, 2017-2018]

OBJECTIVES

Since the authorization of French nulliparous women to donate oocytes, who are the new donors? What are the similar and differential points with the initial donors who have already procreated?

METHODS

Retrospective multicenter cohort study using a questionnaire.

RESULTS

The return rate is 90.7% with 248 donor files from 5 French assisted reproductive technology (ART) centers, included between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2018. The average age is 31,0 years. More than two thirds of women have a higher educational level than the license. Donation is spontaneous or relational in 69% and 25% of cases, respectively. Among nulliparous donors, 37% don't know the possibility of self-preservation but after information, 80% wish to benefit from it versus 32% of multiparous women if they were given the opportunity.

CONCLUSIONS

This study by the Study Group for Egg Donation (GEDO) highlights the particularities of French oocytes donors. The 2015 decree allowed to diversify the origin of the donation, which remains mainly altruistic but the possibility of self-preservation for nulliparous donors also seems to motivate women. This link between donation and self-preservation poses an ethical problem that needs to be approached and resolved in the next Bioethics Law framing Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART).

[Anonymity of gamete donation and genetic testing]

Development of genetic testing direct-to-consumer (DTC) for recreational purposes, although prohibited in France, is a real challenge to the current practice of gamete donation. Indeed, anonymity is a fundamental principle contributing to the ethics of donation. This principle is weakened due to the availability to the general public of these tests on the Internet. Several thousands of people are conceived by gamete donation worldwide, some of whom do not know how they were conceived. Gamete donors should be informed that their anonymity is no longer guaranteed, as they can be found by homologies of their DNA, or that of a parent or a child, potentially available in databases. Thus, adults conceived by gamete donation but not informed by their parents can discover their way of conception. Recipients of gamete donation should also be informed that their child's DNA will establish the biological discrepancy and they should be encouraged to disclose the conception to their child. Several countries now allow children conceived by donation to obtain donor's identity. In France, the Bioethics Law is currently being finalized and will now allow access to donor's identity for people conceived by gamete donation.

Views of French oocyte donors at least 3 years after donation

RESEARCH QUESTION

The study aimed to evaluate the percentage of oocyte donors who regretted their donation at least 3 years later.

DESIGN

Between December 2018 and January 2019, this single-centre study sought to contact by telephone all women who had donated oocytes during the 6-year period from 2010 to 2015 at the Lille Centre for the study and storage of eggs and spermatozoa (CECOS).

RESULTS

Among 118 women, 72 responded to the questionnaire by telephone and were included in the study. The response rate was 61%. No woman regretted having donated an oocyte, and 89% said that they would do it again in the same situation. The survey distinguished two types of donors: 'relational' (58%) and 'altruistic' (42%); some of their responses differed. Ninety per cent of the women had talked about the donation to family and friends. Among them, 74% felt supported by their family and friends, and 72% by their partner. The donation was something that 76% of the women sometimes thought about; 83% felt that this donation was something useful that they had accomplished. Finally, most donors felt that oocyte donation should remain unremunerated and anonymous.

CONCLUSIONS

None of the donors we interviewed regretted their donation. In France, the current principles governing this donation appear satisfactory to oocyte donors.

Support for recognition and payment options for egg and sperm donation in New Zealand and Australia

STUDY QUESTION

To what extent do infertility clinic patients, fertility industry professionals and members of the public support different forms of payment and recognition for egg and sperm donation?

SUMMARY ANSWER

While participants expressed support for reimbursement of expenses for both egg and sperm donation, payment constituting explicit financial advantage was regarded less favourably although potentially necessary to address donor gamete shortages.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

In both New Zealand and Australia, commercial inducement for the supply of gametes is prohibited. This prohibition has been argued to contribute to limited availability of donor gametes with the effect of increasing waiting lists and/or the pursuit of potentially unregulated cross-border reproductive care by domestic patients requiring donor gametes.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

The study was a mixed methods study drawing on data from a questionnaire completed by 434 participants from across New Zealand and Australia between November 2018 and March 2019.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Stakeholders involved in donor-assisted conception (past and present infertility patients, gamete recipients and donors), fertility industry professionals and members of the public were recruited following online advertisement of the study. All participants spoke English and primarily identified as Caucasian. Participants anonymously completed an online questionnaire gauging their support for a range of recognition and payment options. Dependent samples t-tests were used to probe for differences in support of recognition and payment options in relation to egg and sperm donation. Linear regression models were used to determine factors predicting support for the different options for both egg and sperm donation. Thematic analysis was used to identify main themes in free text question responses.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Broadly, there was agreement that donors be reimbursed for medical expenses, travel time, unpaid time away from work relating to treatments and out-of-pocket expenses directly related to the gamete donation process, with greater support suggested for egg versus sperm donors. Items gauging support for non-material recognition and tokens of thanks for donations were not significantly different between egg and sperm donation programmes (P > 0.05) nor rated as highly as reimbursement alternatives. Lowest ratings of support were indicated for the outright payment or reward of donors for the supply of their gametes, options that would leave donors in better financial positions. Qualitatively, themes valuing gamete donation as ideally relating to gifting were identified, although counterbalanced in opinion by concepts of fairness in reimbursing gamete donors for their costs. Where payment over and above the reimbursement of costs was supported, this was related to pragmatic considerations of limited supply of donor gametes.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

This study used a cross-sectional design and consequently causal inferences cannot be made. Additionally, participants particularly professional fertility staff, were required to self-report on politically sensitive and legal issues with the potential for social desirability response bias. Snowball sampling may have led to participation of like-minded individuals, thus limiting generalizations of findings.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

In a climate of global commercialization of reproductive medicine, limited donor gamete availability and rising incidences of cross-border reproductive care, the findings of this study can be used as a basis for further discussion between regulators and professional industry stakeholders with respect to shaping ethical policy and practice relating to donor conception.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

No external funds were sought for this work. None of the authors have any competing interests to declare.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

Dual consent? Donors' and recipients' views about involvement in decision-making on the use of embryos created by gamete donation in research

BACKGROUND

Reasonable disagreement about the role awarded to gamete donors in decision-making on the use of embryos created by gamete donation (EGDs) for research purposes emphasises the importance of considering the implementation of participatory, adaptive, and trustworthy policies and guidelines for consent procedures. However, the perspectives of gamete donors and recipients about decision-making regarding research with EGDs are still under-researched, which precludes the development of policies and guidelines informed by evidence. This study seeks to explore the views of donors and recipients about who should take part in consent processes for the use of EGDs in research.

METHODS

From July 2017 to June 2018, 72 gamete donors and 175 recipients completed a self-report structured questionnaire at the Portuguese Public Bank of Gametes (response rate: 76%). Agreement with dual consent was defined as the belief that the use of EGDs in research should be consented by both donors and recipients.

RESULTS

The majority of participants (74.6% of donors and 65.7% of recipients) were willing to donate embryos for research. Almost half of the donors (48.6%) and half of the recipients (46.9%) considered that a dual consent procedure is desirable. This view was more frequent among employed recipients (49.7%) than among non-employed (21.4%). Donors were less likely to believe that only recipients should be involved in giving consent for the use of EGDs in research (25.0% vs. 41.7% among recipients) and were more frequently favourable to the idea of exclusive donors' consent (26.4% vs. 11.4% among recipients).

CONCLUSIONS

Divergent views on dual consent among donors and recipients indicate the need to develop evidence-based and ethically sustainable policies and guidelines to protect well-being, autonomy and reproductive rights of both stakeholder groups. More empirical research and further theoretical normative analyses are needed to inform people-centred policy and guidelines for shared decision-making concerning the use of EGDs for research.