1
|
Cornthwaite K, Goedeke S, Shepherd D, Rodino I. Student views on recognition and payment options for gamete donation in New Zealand. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2023; 63:753-759. [PMID: 37221091 DOI: 10.1111/ajo.13702] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/07/2022] [Accepted: 05/01/2023] [Indexed: 05/25/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kelsey Cornthwaite
- Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Sonja Goedeke
- Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Daniel Shepherd
- Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Iolanda Rodino
- Medical School, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Caughey LE, White KM, Lensen S, Peate M. Elective egg freezers' disposition decisions: a qualitative study. Fertil Steril 2023:S0015-0282(23)00151-6. [PMID: 37032273 DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2023.02.022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/23/2022] [Revised: 02/14/2023] [Accepted: 02/16/2023] [Indexed: 04/11/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To explore the factors that influence elective egg freezers' disposition decisions toward their surplus-frozen oocytes. DESIGN Qualitative. SETTING Not applicable. PATIENT(S) Thirty-one participants: 7 past; 6 current; and 18 future oocyte disposition decision-makers. INTERVENTION(S) Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S) Qualitative thematic analysis of interview transcripts. RESULTS Six inter-related themes were identified related to the decision-making process which are as follows: decisions are dynamic; triggers for the final decision; achieving motherhood; conceptualization of oocytes; the impacts of egg donation on others; and external factors affecting the final disposition outcome. All women reported a type of trigger event for making a final decision (e.g., completing their family). Women who achieved motherhood were more open to donating their oocytes to others but were concerned about the implications for their child and felt responsibility for potential donor children. Women who did not achieve motherhood were unlikely to donate to others due to the grief of not becoming a mother, often feeling alone, misunderstood, and unsupported. Reclaiming oocytes (e.g., taking them home) and closure ceremonies helped some women process their grief. Donating to research was viewed as an altruistic option as oocytes would not be wasted and did not have the "complication" of a genetically-linked child. There was a general lack of knowledge around disposition options at all stages of the process. CONCLUSION(S) Oocyte disposition decisions are dynamic and complex for women, exacerbated by a general lack of understanding of these options. The final decision is framed by: whether women achieved motherhood, dealing with grief if they did not achieve motherhood, and considering the complexities of donating to others. Additional decision support through counseling, decision aids, and early consideration of disposition when eggs are initially stored may help women make informed decisions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lucy E Caughey
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
| | - Katherine M White
- School of Psychology and Counselling, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Sarah Lensen
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Michelle Peate
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Bracewell-Milnes T, Holland JC, Jones BP, Saso S, Almeida P, Maclaran K, Norman-Taylor J, Nikolaou D, Shah NM, Johnson M, Thum MY. Exploring the knowledge and attitudes of women of reproductive age from the general public towards egg donation and egg sharing: a UK-based study. Hum Reprod 2021; 36:2189-2201. [PMID: 34227667 PMCID: PMC8648294 DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deab157] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/27/2021] [Revised: 05/24/2021] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
STUDY QUESTION What are the knowledge and views of UK-based women towards egg donation (ED) and egg sharing (ES)? SUMMARY ANSWER Lacking knowledge of the practices of ED and ES could be an influential factor in donor egg shortages, rather than negative perceptions or lack of donor anonymity and financial incentives. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY The increasing age of women trying to conceive has led to donor egg shortages, with ED and ES failing to meet demand. Indeed, in recent years in the UK, ES numbers have fallen. This results in long waiting lists, forcing patients abroad for fertility treatment to take up cross border reproductive care. Previous research suggests a lack of knowledge of ED among members of the general public; however, no study has yet assessed knowledge or views of ES in the general public. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION Six hundred and thirty-five UK-based women over 18 years were voluntarily recruited from social media community groups by convenience sampling. The recruitment period was from February to April 2020. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Participants completed a previously validated questionnaire regarding female fertility, ED and ES, including knowledge, perceptions and approval of the practices and relevant legislation. This included ranking key benefits and issues regarding egg sharing. The questionnaire was completed using the online Qualtrics survey software. Statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE Regarding knowledge of ED and ES, 56.3% and 79.8%, respectively had little or no prior knowledge. Upon explanation, most approved of ED (85.8%) and ES (70.4%). A greater proportion of respondents would donate to a family member/friend (49.75%) than to an anonymous recipient (35.80%). Overall, ES was viewed less favourably than ED, with ethical and practical concerns highlighted. Women aged 18-30 years were significantly more likely to approve of egg donation practice compared to those aged >30 years (P < 0.0001). Those against ES found fears of financial coercion or negative psychological wellbeing the most concerning. About 35.8% and 49.7% would personally consider anonymous and known ED, respectively, whilst 56.7% would consider ES. Those answering in favour of egg sharing were significantly more likely to give higher benefit ratings compared to those against the practice (P < 0.001). Most agreed (55.8%) with and were not deterred to donate (60.1%) by the 'Disclosure of Donor Identity' legislation. Only 31.6% agreed with the compensatory cap; however, 52.7% would not be more motivated to donate by an increased cap. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION There were several limitations of the study, including the use of convenience sampling and the voluntary nature of participation opening the study up to sampling and participation bias. Finally, closed questions were predominantly used to allow the generation of quantitative data and statistical analysis. However, this approach prevented opinion justification and qualitative analysis, limiting the depth of conclusions drawn. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS To our knowledge, this is the first study to survey the general public's knowledge and views of ED/ES using a previously validated questionnaire. The conclusion that lack of knowledge could be contributing to the current donor shortfall in the UK demonstrates that campaigns to inform women of the practices are necessary to alleviate donor oocyte shortages. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) No external funds were used for this study. The authors have no conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NA.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Timothy Bracewell-Milnes
- Assisted Conception Unit, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, London, UK.,Division of Surgery and Cancer, Institute of Reproductive & Developmental Biology, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital Campus, London, UK
| | - James C Holland
- Division of Surgery and Cancer, Institute of Reproductive & Developmental Biology, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital Campus, London, UK
| | - Benjamin P Jones
- Division of Surgery and Cancer, Institute of Reproductive & Developmental Biology, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital Campus, London, UK
| | - Srdjan Saso
- Division of Surgery and Cancer, Institute of Reproductive & Developmental Biology, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital Campus, London, UK
| | - Paula Almeida
- Assisted Conception Unit, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, London, UK
| | - Kate Maclaran
- Assisted Conception Unit, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital, London, UK
| | | | | | - Nishel M Shah
- Division of Surgery and Cancer, Institute of Reproductive & Developmental Biology, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital Campus, London, UK
| | - Mark Johnson
- Division of Surgery and Cancer, Institute of Reproductive & Developmental Biology, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital Campus, London, UK.,The Lister Hospital, The Lister Fertility Clinic, London, UK
| | - Meen-Yau Thum
- Division of Surgery and Cancer, Institute of Reproductive & Developmental Biology, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital Campus, London, UK.,The Lister Hospital, The Lister Fertility Clinic, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Oocyte Biobanks: Old Assumptions and New Challenges. BIOTECH 2021; 10:biotech10010004. [PMID: 35822776 PMCID: PMC9245479 DOI: 10.3390/biotech10010004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/04/2021] [Revised: 02/10/2021] [Accepted: 02/11/2021] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
The preservation of fertility is a clinical issue that has been emerging considerably in recent decades, as the number of patients of childbearing age who risk becoming infertile for many reasons is increasing. The cryopreservation technique of oocytes has been developed for many years and nowadays constitutes a method of safe storage with impressive efficacy and high rates of successful thawing. The storage and use for research of oocytes taken for medical or non-medical can be carried out by both public and private structures, through egg sharing, voluntary egg donation and so-called “social freezing” for autologous use. This paper focuses on the oocyte bank as an emerging cryopreservation facility, in which a collaboration between public and private and the creation of a network of these biobanks can be useful in enhancing both their implementation and their functions. Good oocyte biobank practice would require that they be collected, stored, and used according to appropriate bioethical and bio-law criteria, collected and stored according to procedures that guarantee the best preservation of their structural components and a high level of safety, connected with appropriate procedures to protect the rights and privacy of the parties involved and associated with the results of the bio-molecular investigations that will be carried out gradually.
Collapse
|
5
|
Hogan RG, Hammarberg K, Wang AY, Sullivan EA. ‘Battery hens’ or ‘nuggets of gold’: a qualitative study on the barriers and enablers for altruistic egg donation. HUM FERTIL 2021; 25:688-696. [DOI: 10.1080/14647273.2021.1873430] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Rosemarie G. Hogan
- Australian Centre for Public and Population Health Research, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia
- School of Nursing, The University of Notre Dame Australia, Sydney, Australia
| | - Karin Hammarberg
- School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
- Victorian Assisted Reproductive Treatment Authority, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Alex Y. Wang
- Australian Centre for Public and Population Health Research, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Elizabeth A. Sullivan
- Australian Centre for Public and Population Health Research, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia
- Faculty of Health and Medicine, The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Adib Moghaddam E, Kazemi A, Kheirabadi G, Ahmadi SM. Self-image and social-image of the donors: Two different views from oocyte donors' eyes. J Health Psychol 2020; 27:548-556. [PMID: 33023322 DOI: 10.1177/1359105320963211] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
To identify the perceptions of women oocyte donors this qualitative study was conducted on 30 oocyte donors using in-depth interview. The three main categories of decision-making challenge, the consequences of participation in assisted reproductive treatment, and the contrast between the self-image and social-image of the donor were inferred. Financial and altruistic motivation, social taboo, and the approval of trusted people were the sub-categories of the decision-making challenge. The results of the study showed that the decision for oocyte donation follows the effort of women to balance the financial and spiritual benefits of the donation against its cultural barriers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Ashraf Kazemi
- Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Goedeke S, Shepherd D, Rodino IS. Support for recognition and payment options for egg and sperm donation in New Zealand and Australia. Hum Reprod 2020; 35:117-129. [DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dez257] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/25/2019] [Revised: 10/25/2019] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sonja Goedeke
- Department of Psychology, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Daniel Shepherd
- Department of Psychology, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand
| | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Platts S, Bracewell-Milnes T, Saso S, Jones B, Parikh R, Thum MY. Investigating attitudes towards oocyte donation amongst potential donors and the general population: a systematic review. HUM FERTIL 2019; 24:169-181. [DOI: 10.1080/14647273.2019.1602736] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Sophie Platts
- Imperial College Healthcare Trust, Hammersmith Hospital Campus, London, UK
| | - Timothy Bracewell-Milnes
- Division of Surgery and Cancer, Institute of Developmental Reproductive & Developmental Biology, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Srdjan Saso
- Division of Surgery and Cancer, Institute of Developmental Reproductive & Developmental Biology, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Benjamin Jones
- Division of Surgery and Cancer, Institute of Developmental Reproductive & Developmental Biology, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Kool EM, van der Graaf R, Bos AME, Pieters JJPM, Custers IM, Fauser BCJM, Bredenoord AL. Stakeholders views on the ethical aspects of oocyte banking for third-party assisted reproduction: a qualitative interview study with donors, recipients and professionals. Hum Reprod 2019; 34:842-850. [PMID: 30927419 PMCID: PMC9185857 DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dez032] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/18/2018] [Revised: 02/01/2019] [Accepted: 02/19/2019] [Indexed: 01/28/2023] Open
Abstract
STUDY QUESTION What are the moral considerations held by donors, recipients and professionals towards the ethical aspects of the intake and distribution of donor bank oocytes for third-party assisted reproduction? SUMMARY ANSWER Interviews with oocyte donors, oocyte recipients and professionals demonstrate a protective attitude towards the welfare of the donor and the future child. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY The scarcity of donor oocytes challenges the approach towards the many ethical aspects that arise in establishing and operating an oocyte bank for third-party assisted reproduction. Including experiences and moral considerations originating from practice provides useful insight on how to overcome these challenges. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION The project was set-up as a qualitative interview study and took place between October 2016 and August 2017. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS We conducted 25 semi-structured interviews with professionals engaged in the practice of oocyte banking (n = 10), recipients of donor oocytes (n = 7) and oocyte donors (n = 8). Key themes were formulated by means of a thematic analysis. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE Based on the interviews, we formulated four main themes describing stakeholders’ views regarding the ethical aspects of the intake and distribution of donor bank oocytes. First, respondents articulated that when selecting donors and recipients, healthcare workers should prevent donors from making a wrong decision and safeguard the future child’s well-being by minimizing health risks and selecting recipients based on their parental capabilities. Second, they proposed to provide a reasonable compensation and to increase societal awareness on the scarcity of donor oocytes to diminish barriers for donors. Third, respondents considered the prioritization of recipients in case of scarcity a difficult choice, because they are all dependent on donor oocytes to fulfil their wish for a child. They emphasized that treatment attempts should be limited, but at least include one embryo transfer. Fourth and finally, the importance of good governance of oocyte banks was mentioned, including a homogenous policy and the facilitation of exchange of experiences between oocyte banks. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION The possibility of selection bias exists, because we interviewed donors and recipients who were selected according to the criteria currently employed in the clinics. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS Respondents’ moral considerations regarding the ethical aspects of the intake and distribution of donor oocytes demonstrate a protective attitude towards the welfare of the donor and the future child. At the same time, respondents also questioned whether such a (highly) protective attitude was justified. This finding may indicate there is room for reconsidering strategies for the collection and distribution of donor bank oocytes. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(s) This study was funded by ZonMw: The Dutch Organization for Health Research and Development (Grant number 70-73000-98-200). A.M.E.B. and B.C.J.M.F. are the initiators of the UMC Utrecht oocyte bank. J.J.P.M.P. is the director of the MCK Fertility Centre. IMC is working as a gynaecologist at the AMC Amsterdam oocyte bank. During the most recent 5-year period, BCJM Fauser has received fees or grant support from the following organizations (in alphabetic order): Actavis/Watson/Uteron, Controversies in Obstetrics & Gynaecologist (COGI), Dutch Heart Foundation, Dutch Medical Research Counsel (ZonMW), Euroscreen/Ogeda, Ferring, London Womens Clinic (LWC), Merck Serono (GFI), Myovant, Netherland Genomic Initiative (NGI), OvaScience, Pantharei Bioscience, PregLem/Gedeon Richter/Finox, Reproductive Biomedicine Online (RBMO), Roche, Teva and World Health Organization (WHO). The authors have no further competing interests to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER N/A.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E M Kool
- Department of Medical Humanities, University Medical Center Utrecht, Julius Centre, PO Box 85500, Universiteitsweg 100, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - R van der Graaf
- Department of Medical Humanities, University Medical Center Utrecht, Julius Centre, PO Box 85500, Universiteitsweg 100, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - A M E Bos
- Department of Reproductive Medicine and Gynecology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - J J P M Pieters
- MCK Fertility Centre, Center of Reproductive Medicine, Simon Smithweg 16, Leiderdorp, The Netherlands
| | - I M Custers
- Centre for Reproductive Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - B C J M Fauser
- Department of Reproductive Medicine and Gynecology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - A L Bredenoord
- Department of Medical Humanities, University Medical Center Utrecht, Julius Centre, PO Box 85500, Universiteitsweg 100, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
The current status of oocyte banks: domestic and international perspectives. Fertil Steril 2018; 110:1203-1208. [DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.07.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/21/2018] [Revised: 07/03/2018] [Accepted: 07/13/2018] [Indexed: 01/07/2023]
|
11
|
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
|
12
|
Kool EM, Bos AME, van der Graaf R, Fauser BCJM, Bredenoord AL. Ethics of oocyte banking for third-party assisted reproduction: a systematic review. Hum Reprod Update 2018; 24:615-635. [DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmy016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2017] [Accepted: 04/20/2018] [Indexed: 12/29/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- E M Kool
- Department of Medical Humanities, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Universiteitsweg 100, GA Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Reproductive Medicine and Gynaecology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, CX Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - A M E Bos
- Department of Reproductive Medicine and Gynaecology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, CX Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - R van der Graaf
- Department of Medical Humanities, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Universiteitsweg 100, GA Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - B C J M Fauser
- Department of Reproductive Medicine and Gynaecology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, CX Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - A L Bredenoord
- Department of Medical Humanities, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Universiteitsweg 100, GA Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|