Understanding the Reproductive Experience and Pregnancy Outcomes of Lesbian Women Undergoing Donor Intrauterine Insemination

The characteristics and parenthood aspirations of single women and lesbian couples seeking motherhood through sperm donation

INTRODUCTION

In 2021, France authorized access to assisted reproductive technology (ART) for single women (SWs) and lesbian couples (LCs). We aimed to describe these new populations and compare their characteristics with those of the historical population of heterosexual couples (HCs) using ART with sperm donation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We conducted a monocentric observational retrospective study at the Nancy Regional University Hospital Fertility Center from October 1, 2021, to June 30, 2023. The demographic and clinical characteristics of all the women/couples willing to engage in parenthood with sperm donation, as well as their parenthood aspirations data, were collected.

RESULTS

We included 638 women/couples; 49.7 % were SWs; 44.5 % were LCs; and only 5.8 % were HCs. The mean age of the whole population was 33.4 ± 5.5 years. The SW population was significantly older by 6 years and came from executive and intellectual professions. A total of 18.3 % of the LCs were interested in the reception of oocytes from the partner (ROPA). HCs (77.8 %) and LCs (73.2 %) were more interested in phenotypic matching than SWs (49.1 %) (p < 0.001). Monocentric support was more common in SW patients (88.9 %) than in LCs patients (79.5 %) and HCs (56.8 %) (p < 0.001).

DISCUSSION

In a large cohort, we focused on and discussed the characteristics and the aspirations of these intended parents. We found that new populations favored ART with sperm donation. The overall characteristics of both heterosexual and lesbian couples were broadly comparable, as were the two LCs members. A French multicenter large-scale prospective study and anthropological studies are necessary to confirm and explain this data.

Therapeutic donor insemination for LGBTQ+ families: a systematic review

IMPORTANCE

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer+ (LGBTQ+) families deserve evidence-based care within environments designed for their unique needs; however, care provided in fertility clinics has been reported to fall short, most notably for assigned female at birth recipients of therapeutic donor insemination (TDI).

OBJECTIVE

To identify the aspects of routine infertility care that are clinically appropriate for this unique patient population, specifically those seeking pregnancy with donor sperm. The research question was posed, "What screening and treatment protocols are supported by the evidence regarding TDI care for LGBTQ+ families?"

EVIDENCE REVIEW

High quality, prospective studies specific to and/or inclusive of this patient population in assisted reproductive care contexts is limited, however evidence regarding age-informed prognosis, screening guidelines, treatment outcomes, insemination timing, number of inseminations per cycle, when to refer, and safety of the procedure were found.

FINDINGS

Findings indicate that compared with routine infertility care protocols, a low-tech, low-intervention model of care for ovulatory LGBTQ+ individuals renders equal or higher success rates without increasing risk.

CONCLUSION

Given the current evidence, TDI for LGBTQ+ families can, with support and training, be provided appropriately in a variety of contexts, including community-based and primary care settings as well as in fertility clinics.

RELEVANCE

This review establishes the current state of the evidence supporting TDI for LGBTQ+ families, expanding access to care for recipients as well as their care providers and outlining areas for further study.

Autonomy and Respect in Pregnancy Care for LGBTQIA+ Families: Evaluation of a Home Visiting Program

The purpose of this program evaluation was to gather information on proportions of LGBTQIA+ individuals and families, their needs, and care experiences in a county health department's home visiting programs for perinatal clients and to make recommendations for improving culturally competent care for LGBTQIA+ individuals and families. In this engaged scholarship partnership, home visiting nurses administered a questionnaire to perinatal clients including demographic information on sexual orientation and gender identity. Differences between LBGTQIA+ identifying individuals' perception of the perinatal care received and those of heterosexual, cisgender individuals were assessed. On the basis of these data, 10% of the 52 respondents identified as LGBTQIA+ and 4% identified with a gender other than "woman." Clients who identified as straight had similar mean scores to those who listed an LGBTQIA+ sexual orientation. Clients who chose a gender identity other than "woman" had scores that fell within the 50th to 75th percentile of the overall mean. Qualitative interviews with 2 respondents provided additional in-depth information on their experiences. Overall, clients served by these perinatal programs reported similar diversity in terms of gender identity and sexual orientation as compared with national averages. This project provided evidence of the diversity among the clientele served by this agency and the importance of expanding the focus on inclusionary language and practices.

Menopause experiences in sexual minority women and non-binary people

Sexual minority women (lesbian/gay, bisexual, and queer-identified cisgender women) as well as non-binary people have unique experiences in menopause but remain underrepresented in the scientific literature as compared with cisgender, heterosexual women. This review provides an overview of their experiences with menopause, including menstrual cessation, menopause symptoms, experiences with healthcare systems, and sexual health. The end of menstruation comes with mixed emotions for many sexual minority women, including sadness, grief, relief, and a sense of freedom. Sexual and gender minority individuals often experience discrimination and bias in healthcare encounters. So, too, do sexual minority women and non-binary people report negative experiences with the healthcare system while navigating menopause. In particular, this includes challenges locating inclusive menopause resources and culturally competent clinicians who create safe, trusting healthcare environments. In contrast to heterosexual women, sexual minority women have more open communication with partners regarding sexual function during menopause, and often have greater sexual satisfaction due to more expansive definitions of sex and pleasure. Non-binary individuals can experience distress, isolation, and gender dysphoria during the menopause transition, though research on their experiences remains extremely limited. To better care for sexual and gender minorities, more inclusive menopause education resources and healthcare environments are sorely needed, as are culturally competent healthcare clinicians. Increasing representation of sexual and gender minorities in the scientific literature on menopause is also crucial to improve understanding and clinical care.

Fertility treatment outcomes in transgender men with a history of testosterone therapy

Objective

To evaluate fertility treatment outcomes among transgender (TG) men with a history of gender-affirming hormone therapy with exogenous testosterone.

Design

Descriptive, retrospective cohort study.

Patients

Transgender men with a history of gender-affirming hormone therapy with exogenous testosterone underwent fertility treatments, including embryo cryopreservation, in vitro fertilization (IVF), co-IVF, oocyte cryopreservation, and intrauterine insemination (IUI), between 2013 and 2021.

Intervention

Gender-affirming hormone therapy with testosterone.

Main Outcome Measures

Live births (LBs), number of frozen embryos, and number of frozen oocytes. Other outcome measures included total gonadotropin used, peak estradiol levels, oocytes retrieved, oocyte maturity rate, fertilization rate, and embryo grade.

Results

A total of 77 TG men self-presented or were referred to care at a single academic fertility center, of which 46 (59.7%) TG men underwent fertility preservation and/or family-building counseling, with 16 (20.8%) patients proceeding to fertility treatment. Of those patients who underwent treatment, 11 (68.8%) had a history of gender-affirming hormone therapy with exogenous testosterone use. Cohort 1 included IVF (n = 1), co-IVF (n = 1), embryo cryopreservation (n = 2), cohort 2 included oocyte cryopreservation (n = 4), and cohort 3 included IUI (n = 3). In cohort 1, both the patients who underwent IVF and the patients who underwent co-IVF achieved LBs. All embryo cryopreservation cycles froze three or more embryos. In cohort 2, the average number of frozen mature oocytes was 19.3 ± 16.2 (range 6-43). All patients who underwent IUI cycles achieved LB.

Conclusion

In this study, no correlation existed between patient age, time on or off gender-affirming hormone therapy with exogenous testosterone, total gonadotropin used, and number of oocytes retrieved. All patients who completed IVF or embryo cryopreservation produced high-quality blastocytes, and this is the first study to show successful IUI cycles in patients with a history of gender-affirming hormone therapy with exogenous testosterone. This study demonstrates that TG men who have used gender-affirming hormone therapy previously can successfully undergo fertility treatments to attain oocyte and embryo cryopreservation, pregnancy, and LBs.

Identity and pregnancy in conflict?: an examination of sexual minority women using qualitative description

While there is growing documentation of pregnancy among sexual minority women, little research has focused on their perceptions and experiences of conflict between sexual minority identity and pregnancy. Because of this, this study used Social Identity Theory and qualitative descriptive analysis to explore the following questions: do sexual minority women perceive sexual minority identity and pregnancy as in conflict; and if so, from where does this conflict arise and how do sexual minority women experience it? Participants included 21 lesbian, gay, bisexual, queer and other non-heterosexual cisgender women, a third of whom had previously been pregnant. Themes captured internally located conflict, including participants who saw pregnancy as irrelevant and those who experienced pregnancy as acceptable for sexual minority women; imposed conflict from healthcare contexts, including both health provider assumptions and imposed conflict on reproductive autonomy; and ambivalence. Overall, few participants noted internalised conflict between their sexual minority identity and pregnancy. Instead, sexual minority women experienced ambivalence or imposed conflict between their sexual minority identities and pregnancy from their health providers, although this imposed conflict was not limited to sexual orientation.

Protective Relational Factors of Lesbian Couples Navigating the Fertility Process

Little research about lesbian couples' experiences with fertility treatment exists in the counseling literature. While there is an increase in lesbian couples exploring fertility options to expand their families, it is important to understand their experiences during this stressful process. This research seeks to understand these experiences using Moustakas' Imaginative Variation method with seven lesbian couples. Results include feelings of isolation, psychological and physical stress. Despite myriad difficulties associated with assisted reproductive technology, participants' experiences show the presence of strong relationship factors, divided into three categories: connectedness, mutuality, and resilience. The use of Relational Cultural Theory may be helpful to lesbian couples looking to expand their families through reproductive methods.

Lesbian shared IVF: the ROPA method: a systematic review

The ROPA (Reception of Oocytes from PArtner) method, also known as lesbian shared IVF (in vitro fertilization), is an assisted reproduction technique for female couples, in which one of the women provides the oocytes (genetic mother) and the other receives the embryo and gestates (gestational mother). As a double parented method, it is the only way lesbian women may biologically share motherhood. This is a narrative review of data concerning ROPA published in PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library. A total of 35 articles were included, 10 about motivations for undergoing ROPA, 13 about ethics or legislation, 4 about motherhood, and 8 studies reporting clinical outcomes. Despite being used for more than a decade, there is a paucity of data regarding this technique in scientific literature. Most women choose this technique to share biological motherhood, but medical issues may also justify its use. Many ethical and legal issues are still to be solved. Despite the small number of studies, data regarding the outcomes of this technique and the resulting motherhood are reassuring.

Provision of fertility services to women in same-sex relationships at Catholic and non-Catholic clinics in the United States

INTRODUCTION

This study addressed deficient information on the provision of infertility care in obstetrics and gynecology clinics. We additionally evaluated the availability of these services based on clinic affiliations or stated sexual orientation.

METHODOLOGY

We performed a national cross-sectional "mystery caller" survey of 293 general obstetrics and gynecology clinics in 2017-2018. We matched clinics identified by web-based search engine in a 1:1 ratio by Catholic hospital affiliation, after determining number of clinics based on state-population densities. A standard call script included questions regarding provision of infertility services, ovulation induction methods, and information about the caller's sexual orientation. We performed descriptive frequencies and compared responses based on hospital affiliations.

RESULTS

Of the 293 clinics included, 49% were affiliated with Catholic and 17% with academic hospitals. The majority offered infertility care (85%, 248/293), and of these 97% (240/248) offered ovulation induction. Only 3% (6/240) reported they would not provide to women in same-sex relationships. Most clinics not offering infertility evaluations (43/45, 96%) cited it was outside of their scope of care and of these 33% (15/45) did not provide information for self-referral. Clinics affiliated with academic (aOR 0.23) or Catholic (aOR 0.34) hospitals were less likely to provide evaluations. Those with academic affiliation were more likely to provide information for self-referral (aOR 19.2).

DISCUSSION

Most general obstetrics and gynecology practices offered appointments for infertility evaluation and ovulation induction. Clinics rarely denied services to women reporting a same-sex partnership, regardless of hospital affiliation. These findings provide reassurance to same-sex couples seeking fertility care.

Minority stress theory applied to conception, pregnancy, and pregnancy loss: A qualitative study examining LGBTQ+ people’s experiences

Many lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (trans), queer, and other sexual and gender minority (LGBTQ+) people desire to conceive children. Yet, LGBTQ+ peoples’ experiences are scant in reproductive health literature, particularly around pregnancy loss—a stigmatized and distressing pregnancy outcome. Informed by minority stress theory, this qualitative study aimed to explore the experiences of multi-level stigma and resilience among LGBTQ+ people in the context of conception, pregnancy, and loss. Seventeen semi-structured individual interviews (25–70 minutes) were conducted (2019) with a purposive sample of LGBTQ+ people in the United States (U.S.) who had experienced pregnancy loss (n = 14) or in an intimate partnership in which a pregnancy was lost (n = 3) in the last two years. Transcribed interviews were analyzed thematically. Participants described the profound sadness of pregnancy loss due to unique challenges of LGBTQ+ conception. Multiple types of stigma manifested at intrapersonal (e.g., anticipated sexual stigma upon disclosure), interpersonal (e.g., unsolicited advice about conception decisions), and structural levels (e.g., differential requirements to access conception compared to heterosexual/cisgender couples). Resilience was also seen individually (e.g., purposeful disclosure of conception, pregnancy, and loss), relationally (e.g., connecting with other LGBTQ+ community members), and collectively (e.g., creating/engaging in LGBTQ+-specific conception, pregnancy, and loss online spaces). LGBTQ+ people experience minority stressors of multi-level stigmatization throughout the pregnancy process, which limits their access to social support after experiencing pregnancy loss. However, individual, relational, and collective resilience strategies abound in response. Thus, minority stress theory can also be applied to recognize strengths-based and affirming approaches to reproductive healthcare for LGBTQ+ people.

Sexual and/or gender minority disparities in obstetrical and birth outcomes

BACKGROUND

Many sexual and/or gender minority individuals build families through pregnancy and childbirth, but it is unknown whether they experience different clinical outcomes than those who are not sexual and/or gender minority individuals.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate obstetrical and birth outcomes comparing couples who are likely sexual and/or gender minority patients compared with those who are not likely to be sexual and/or gender minority patients.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a population-based cohort study of live birth hospitalizations during 2016 to 2019 linked to birth certificates in California. California changed its birth certificate in 2016 to include gender-neutral fields such as "parent giving birth" and "parent not giving birth," with options for each role to specify "mother," "father," or "parent." We classified birthing patients in mother-mother partnerships and those who identified as a father in any partnership as likely sexual and/or gender minority and classified birthing patients in mother-father partnerships as likely not sexual and/or gender minority. We used multivariable modified Poisson regression models to estimate the risk ratios for associations between likely sexual and/or gender minority parental structures and outcomes. The models were adjusted for sociodemographic factors, comorbidities, and multifetal gestation selected by causal diagrams. We replicated the analyses after excluding multifetal gestations.

RESULTS

In the final birthing patient sample, 1,483,119 were mothers with father partners, 2572 were mothers with mother partners, and 498 were fathers with any partner. Compared with birthing patients in mother-father partnerships, birthing patients in mother-mother partnerships experienced significantly higher rates of multifetal gestation (adjusted risk ratio, 3.9; 95% confidence interval, 3.4-4.4), labor induction (adjusted risk ratio, 1.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-1.3), postpartum hemorrhage (adjusted risk ratio, 1.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-1.6), severe morbidity (adjusted risk ratio, 1.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-1.8), and nontransfusion severe morbidity (adjusted risk ratio, 1.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-1.9). Severe morbidity was identified following the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention "severe maternal morbidity" index. Gestational diabetes mellitus, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, cesarean delivery, preterm birth (<37 weeks' gestation), low birthweight (<2500 g), and low Apgar score (<7 at 5 minutes) did not significantly differ in the multivariable analyses. No outcomes significantly differed between father birthing patients in any partnership and birthing patients in mother-father partnerships in either crude or multivariable analyses, though the risk of multifetal gestation was nonsignificantly higher (adjusted risk ratio, 1.5; 95% confidence interval, 0.9-2.7). The adjusted risk ratios for the outcomes were similar after restriction to singleton gestations.

CONCLUSION

Birthing mothers with mother partners experienced disparities in several obstetrical and birth outcomes independent of sociodemographic factors, comorbidities, and multifetal gestation. Birthing fathers in any partnership were not at a significantly elevated risk of any adverse obstetrical or birth outcome considered in this study.

Pregnancy success rates for lesbian women undergoing intrauterine insemination

Objective

To compare the pregnancy outcomes of lesbian women undergoing donor sperm intrauterine insemination (IUI) with that of heterosexual women undergoing IUI using partner or donor sperm.

Design

Retrospective cohort analysis.

Setting

Two academic fertility practices.

Patient(s)

All IUI cycles between 2007 and 2016.

Intervention(s)

None.

Main outcome measure(s)

Primary outcomes included clinical pregnancy (CP) rates and live birth/ongoing pregnancy (LB) rates. The baseline characteristics and cycle characteristics were compared between the two groups using absolute standardized differences (ASDs). To account for the correlation between cycles per patient, a generalized estimating equation method for multivariable logistic regression was used.

Results

A total of 11,870 IUI cycles were included, of which 393 were in lesbian women using donor sperm and 11,477 were in heterosexual women with infertility using either partner or donor sperm. The CP rates were similar between the lesbian and heterosexual groups (13.2% vs. 11.1%, respectively, ASD = 0.06). In addition, the LB rates were similar between the two groups (10.4% vs. 8.3%, respectively, ASD = 0.10). After implementing the generalized estimating equation in a multivariable logistic regression, the lesbian group had an overall higher odds of CP (adjusted odds ratio 1.40, 95% confidence interval: [1.04–1.88]) and LB (adjusted odds ratio 1.59, 95% confidence interval [1.15–2.20]) compared with the heterosexual group. The clinical miscarriage rate was higher in the heterosexual group compared with that in the lesbian group (23.8% vs. 15.4%, respectively, ASD = 0.21).

Conclusion

Although the unadjusted rates were similar between the two groups, the adjusted CP and LB odds were significantly higher for lesbian women undergoing IUI for procreative management than those for heterosexual women undergoing IUI for infertility.