1
|
Pennings G. The moral obligation to have genetically related children. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS 2024:jme-2023-109760. [PMID: 38851293 DOI: 10.1136/jme-2023-109760] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/22/2023] [Accepted: 05/28/2024] [Indexed: 06/10/2024]
Abstract
Donor conceived persons are likely to have a lower quality of life than persons who are genetically related to both parents. Empirical evidence is presented to corroborate this point. The evidence is subdivided into three sections: (1) negative experience of the donor conception itself, (2) negative effects of secrecy and openness and (3) negative effects of donor anonymity and donor identifiability. The principle of procreative beneficence requires parents to select the child with the best possible life. Given the difference in quality of life, intended parents should try to have a genetically related child. This finding is also a strong reason for society to invest public resources in the development of techniques that enable people to create genetically related children.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Guido Pennings
- Philosophy and Moral Science, Universiteit Gent, Gent, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Ben-Kimhy R, Taubman–Ben-Ari O. Perceptions of Fertility Physicians Treating Women Undergoing IVF Using an Egg Donation. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2022; 19:ijerph19127159. [PMID: 35742403 PMCID: PMC9222713 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19127159] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/07/2022] [Revised: 06/08/2022] [Accepted: 06/09/2022] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
In the course of their work, medical teams are routinely exposed to difficult and stressful situations. The few studies in the literature that have examined physicians’ perceptions and responses to such situations have focused primarily on the fields of emergency medicine and chronic and terminal illness. However, the field of fertility medicine can also evoke complex feelings among physicians. The present qualitative study examined the perceptions of fertility physicians treating women undergoing egg donation. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with 20 fertility physicians, and a categorical analysis was performed. The main category to emerge was the physicians’ perception of egg donation and its implications. Two prominent themes were identified within this category: doctor–patient communication surrounding egg donation and how the idea was presented to the patient; and doctors’ perception of the implications of egg donation, including maternal identity, the relationship between mother and infant, and the mother’s sense of the child’s identity. This is the first study to consider the response to fertility treatments, a contemporary and sensitive topic, from the perspective of the physicians. The findings can contribute to physicians’ understanding of themselves and can help to devise ways to assist them in managing their emotional responses to their work for the benefit of both themselves and their patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Reut Ben-Kimhy
- IVF Unit, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Meir Medical Center, Kfar Saba 4428164, Israel;
- The Gender Studies Program, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan 5290002, Israel
| | - Orit Taubman–Ben-Ari
- The Louis and Gabi Weisfeld School of Social Work, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan 5290002, Israel
- Correspondence:
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Widbom A, Sydsjö G, Lampic C. Psychological adjustment in disclosing and non-disclosing heterosexual-couple families following conception with oocytes or sperm from identity-release donors. Reprod Biomed Online 2022; 45:1046-1053. [DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2022.06.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/03/2022] [Revised: 05/27/2022] [Accepted: 06/16/2022] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
|
4
|
Kirkman-Brown J, Calhaz-Jorge C, Dancet EAF, Lundin K, Martins M, Tilleman K, Thorn P, Vermeulen N, Frith L. OUP accepted manuscript. Hum Reprod Open 2022; 2022:hoac001. [PMID: 35178481 PMCID: PMC8847071 DOI: 10.1093/hropen/hoac001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/14/2021] [Revised: 12/14/2021] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
STUDY QUESTION What information and support should be offered to donors, intended parents and donor-conceived people, in general and in consideration of the availability of direct-to-consumer genetic testing and matching services? SUMMARY ANSWER For donors, intended parents and donor-conceived offspring, recommendations are made that cover information needs and informed consent, psychosocial implications and disclosure. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Trends indicate that the use of donor-assisted conception is growing and guidance is needed to help these recipients/intended parents, the donors and offspring, navigate the rapidly changing environment in which donor-assisted conception takes place. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION A working group (WG) collaborated on writing recommendations based, where available, on evidence collected from a literature search and expert opinion. Draft recommendations were published for stakeholder review and adapted where relevant based on the comments received. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Papers retrieved from PUBMED were included from 1 January 2014 up to 31 August 2020, focusing on studies published since direct-to-consumer genetic testing has become more widespread and accessible. The current paper is limited to reproductive donation performed in medically assisted reproduction (MAR) centres (and gamete banks): donation outside the medical context was not considered. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE In total, 32 recommendations were made for information provision and support to donors, 32 for intended parents and 27 for donor-conceived offspring requesting information/support. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION The available evidence in the area of reproductive donation is limited and diverse with regards to the context and types of donation. General conclusions and recommendations are largely based on expert opinion and may need to be adapted in light of future research. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS These recommendations provide guidance to MAR centres and gamete banks on good practice in information provision and support but should also be considered by regulatory bodies and policymakers at a national and international level to guide regulatory and legislative efforts towards the protection of donors and donor-conceived offspring. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) The development of this good practice paper was funded by European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), covering expenses associated with the WG meetings, the literature searches and dissemination. The WG members did not receive any payment. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. DISCLAIMER This document represents the views of ESHRE, which are the result of consensus between the relevant ESHRE stakeholders and where relevant based on the scientific evidence available at the time of preparation. The recommendations should be used for informational and educational purposes. They should not be interpreted as setting a standard of care, or be deemed inclusive of all proper methods of care nor exclusive of other methods of care reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. They do not replace the need for application of clinical judgement to each individual presentation, nor variations based on locality and facility type. †ESHRE pages content is not externally peer reviewed. The manuscript has been approved by the Executive Committee of ESHRE.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Jackson Kirkman-Brown
- Centre for Human Reproductive Science, University of Birmingham, IMSR, Birmingham, UK
- Correspondence address. University of Birmingham, IMSR, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK. E-mail: ;
| | | | - Eline A F Dancet
- KU Leuven, Department of Development and Regeneration, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Kersti Lundin
- Department of Reproductive Medicine, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - Mariana Martins
- University of Porto, Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences, Porto, Portugal
| | - Kelly Tilleman
- Department for Reproductive Medicine, Universitair Ziekenhuis Gent, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Petra Thorn
- Private Practice, Couple and Family Therapy, Infertility Counseling, Mörfelden, Germany
| | - Nathalie Vermeulen
- European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) Central Office, Strombeek-Bever, Belgium
| | - Lucy Frith
- Centre for Social Ethics and Policy, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Kirkman-Brown JC, Martins MV. 'Genes versus children': if the goal is parenthood, are we using the optimal approach? Hum Reprod 2021; 35:5-11. [PMID: 31916579 PMCID: PMC6993870 DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dez256] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/29/2019] [Revised: 10/27/2019] [Indexed: 01/02/2023] Open
Abstract
First medical contact for couples trying for a child will usually emphasise the array of assistance available to ‘help them have their own child’, usually with options involving ART, after diagnosis. For many poorer prognosis couples, this means repetitive unsuccessful cycles of invasive and stressful treatment. What is sometimes lost at this stage is a reflection on the likelihood of success of different options, which may lead patients to focus on hoping for their own ‘genetic’ progeny, but failing to consider the alternative and potentially more successful other options, including donation and adoption, for achieving parenthood of a child. Factors not only such as female age but also advanced requirements such as preimplantation genetic testing or even mitochondrial replacement therapies all have reduced chances of success but further tend to reinforce the importance of a genetic link. The financial, physical and psychosocial burden associated with cumulative failure also lead to a higher probability of dropout and consequently an even higher probability of remaining in involuntary childlessness. We advocate formulation of a detailed roadmap for discussion of parenthood, with reference explanation to genetics and epigenetics, which gives due consideration to the psychological effects from the beginning to end of the treatment process, alongside a balanced consideration of the likelihood of treatment success and discussion of other options. Only when we provide patients with the service of a clear and transparent discussion of these matters, we will really realise the true potential of our field, which may then be better considered as assisted families.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jackson C Kirkman-Brown
- Centre for Human Reproductive Science, IMSR, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK.,Birmingham Women's Fertility Centre, Birmingham Women's & Children's NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham B15 2TG, UK
| | - Mariana V Martins
- Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Porto, Porto 4200-135, Portugal.,Centre for Psychology at University of Porto, Porto 4200-135, Portugal
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Problematizing donor conception and drawing the right conclusions from the evidence. Fertil Steril 2021; 115:1179-1180. [PMID: 33743956 DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2021.02.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2021] [Accepted: 02/05/2021] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
|
7
|
Hadizadeh-Talasaz F, Simbar M, Latifnejad Roudsari R. Exploring Infertile Couples' Decisions to Disclose Donor Conception to The Future Child. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FERTILITY & STERILITY 2020; 14:240-246. [PMID: 33098393 PMCID: PMC7604704 DOI: 10.22074/ijfs.2020.44408] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/07/2019] [Accepted: 06/02/2020] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
Background Despite significant advances in reproductive technology, using donor assisted reproductive technology
is a double-edged sword that has numerous challenges. One of the most challenging issues for couples is whether or
not to disclose this information to donor offspring. This study, therefore, explored infertile couples’ decision to dis-
close donor conception to their future child. Materials and Methods This qualitative study was conducted using content analysis approach in 2012 in the Milad
Infertility Centre, Mashhad, Iran. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 32 infertile persons
including nine couples and 14 women who were selected by purposive sampling. Data were analysed by conven-
tional qualitative content analysis adopted by Graneheim and Lundman using MAXQDA 2010 software. Results Two categories were emerged: ‘not to disclose information to the child’ and ‘to disclose information to
the child’. The first category consisted of three subcategories: 1. child support from probable harms; 2.to maintain
healthy family relationships; and 3. lack of a compelling reason to disclose this information. The second category
embraced four subcategories: 1. awareness of the others; 2. emergence of new living conditions; 3. appreciation for
the donor; and 4. honesty among family members. The main reason for not disclosing information was to protect the
child from probable harm. Conclusion Although protecting children from possible harms was a major reason for infertile couples' secrecy,
keeping this secret would not be always easy. Therefore, increasing public awareness about the donation process in
order to change the beliefs of community and eliminate the infertile couples’ concerns would help them to overcome
this problem. Additionally, long-term psychological counselling during and after the donation process is highly rec-
ommended.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fatemeh Hadizadeh-Talasaz
- Department of Midwifery, Faculty of Medicine, Social Development and Health Promotion Research Centre, Gonabad University of Medical Sciences, Gonabad, Iran
| | - Masoumeh Simbar
- Midwifery and Reproductive Health Research Centre, Department of Midwifery and Reproductive Health, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Robab Latifnejad Roudsari
- Nursing and Midwifery Care Research Centre, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.,Department of Midwifery, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran. Electronic Address:
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Arocho R, Lozano EB, Halpern CT. Estimates of donated sperm use in the United States: National Survey of Family Growth 1995-2017. Fertil Steril 2019; 112:718-723. [PMID: 31371048 PMCID: PMC6765402 DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.05.031] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/29/2019] [Revised: 05/06/2019] [Accepted: 05/22/2019] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To provide national estimates of donor insemination (DI) use in the United States and a description of the population of users. DESIGN Population estimates were generated from nationally representative data through weighted proportions and count estimates. SETTING Not applicable. PATIENT(S) Participants were U.S. women of childbearing age (15-44 years) sampled for interview in the National Survey of Family Growth. INTERVENTION(S) None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S) Respondents who reported having received artificial insemination were asked the origin of the sperm. Responses could include husband/partner, donor only, or mixed donor and husband/partner. RESULT(S) In 1995, an estimated 170,701 (95% confidence interval 106,577-234,825) women had undergone DI using donor or mixed sperm. In 2015-2017, 440,986 (95% confidence interval 108,458-773,513) women were estimated to have used it. The DI users were mostly white, urban, older, college-educated, and had high family incomes. CONCLUSION(S) The DI use changed over time, from a decrease between 1995 and 2013 to a precipitous growth in 2015 to 2017. In recent years, nearly half a million women may be dealing with personal, relationship, and familial issues born of DI use. The United States does not maintain records on the usage of donor sperm, but better tracking of the use and outcomes of treatment would provide better estimates of the size of the affected population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel Arocho
- Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
| | - Elizabeth B Lozano
- Department of Psychology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, Illinois
| | - Carolyn T Halpern
- Department of Maternal and Child Health, UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Pennings G. Reply: Ethics of anonymity in gamete donation and genetic databases. Hum Reprod 2019; 34:1850-1851. [DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dez145] [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: 11/14/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- G Pennings
- Department of Philosophy and Moral Science, Ghent University, Blandinberg 2, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Hodson N, Bewley S. Abuse in assisted reproductive technology: A systematic qualitative review and typology. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2019; 238:170-177. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2019.05.027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/20/2019] [Revised: 05/18/2019] [Accepted: 05/23/2019] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
|
11
|
Klock S, Lindheim SR. Mater semper certa est: motherhood is always certain. Fertil Steril 2019; 110:1185-1186. [PMID: 30503103 DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.09.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2018] [Accepted: 09/06/2018] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
The development of oocyte donation has led to a reexamination of the facets of motherhood: the genetic, gestational, and psychosocial contributions. In addition, the practice of oocyte donation has prompted a consideration of the unique psychosocial and legal aspects of this form of family building. In this section of Views and Reviews a summary and discussion of the long-term psychosocial adjustment of oocyte donor-conceived children and their parents is presented. Next, the current permeability around donor anonymity is investigated and questions regarding whether donor anonymity can still exist is discussed. Third, the evolution of oocyte cryopreservation and banking is reviewed and the future of oocyte banking is explored. Finally, as oocyte donation continues to grow and evolve, so too does the legal landscape in which it is practiced. Seminal legal cases are presented to describe the legal landscape that has shaped the practice of oocyte donation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Susan Klock
- Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Psychiatry, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois.
| | - Steven R Lindheim
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Boonshoft School of Medicine, Wright State University, Dayton, Ohio
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
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
|
13
|
Schrijvers A, Bos H, van Rooij F, Gerrits T, van der Veen F, Mochtar M, Visser M. Being a donor-child: wishes for parental support, peer support and counseling. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol 2019; 40:29-37. [PMID: 29110558 DOI: 10.1080/0167482x.2017.1396313] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/18/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES We aimed at exploring the wishes of Dutch donor-conceived offspring for parental support, peer support and counseling and sought to contribute to the improvement of health care for all parties involved with assisted reproductive technologies. METHODS We held semi-structured in-depth interviews with 24 donor-conceived offspring (Mage = 26.9, range 17-41) born within father-mother, two-mother and single mother families. The majority of the donor offspring was conceived with semen of anonymous donors. All offspring were recruited by network organizations and snowball sampling. The interviews were fully transcribed and analyzed using the constant comparative method. RESULTS Donor-conceived offspring wished that their parents had talked openly about donor conception and had missed parental support. They wished that their parents would have received counseling before donor sperm treatment on how to talk with their children about donor conception in several stages of life. They valued the availability of peer contact to exchange stories with other donor-conceived offspring and would have liked assistance in getting access to trustworthy information about characteristics and identifying information of their donor. Donor-conceived offspring wished to know where to find specialist counseling when needed. CONCLUSIONS Peer support and counseling by professionals for donor-conceived offspring should be available for those who need it. The findings also support professional counseling for intended parents before treatment to improve parental support for donor-children.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne Schrijvers
- a Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Centre for Reproductive Medicine , Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam , Amsterdam , The Netherlands
| | - Henny Bos
- b Faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences , Research Institute of Child Development and Education, University of Amsterdam , Amsterdam , The Netherlands
| | - Floor van Rooij
- b Faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences , Research Institute of Child Development and Education, University of Amsterdam , Amsterdam , The Netherlands
| | - Trudie Gerrits
- c Faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences , Sociology and Anthropology, University of Amsterdam , Amsterdam , The Netherlands
| | - Fulco van der Veen
- a Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Centre for Reproductive Medicine , Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam , Amsterdam , The Netherlands
| | - Monique Mochtar
- a Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Centre for Reproductive Medicine , Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam , Amsterdam , The Netherlands
| | - Marja Visser
- a Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Centre for Reproductive Medicine , Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam , Amsterdam , The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
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
|
15
|
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
|
16
|
Yamamoto N, Hirata T, Izumi G, Nakazawa A, Fukuda S, Neriishi K, Arakawa T, Takamura M, Harada M, Hirota Y, Koga K, Wada-Hiraike O, Fujii T, Irahara M, Osuga Y. A survey of public attitudes towards third-party reproduction in Japan in 2014. PLoS One 2018; 13:e0198499. [PMID: 30379816 PMCID: PMC6209135 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0198499] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/19/2018] [Accepted: 09/25/2018] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective The objective of this study was to examine public attitudes towards third-party reproduction and the disclosure of conception through third-party reproduction. Methods We conducted the web-based survey for the public attitude towards third-party reproduction in February 2014. Twenty-five hundred people were recruited with equal segregation of age (20s, 30s, 40s, and 50s) and gender. We analyzed the association between gender, age, infertility, and ethical view using a questionnaire regarding donor sperm, donor oocyte, donor embryo, gestational surrogacy, and disclosure to offspring. Results Of the respondents, 36.2% approved and 26.6% disapproved of gamete or embryo donation. The frequency of those who approved was lowest in females in the 50–59 year age group, and was significantly higher in males or females with infertility. Secondly, 40.9% approved and 21.8% disapproved of gestational surrogacy. The frequency of those who approved gestational surrogacy was higher in males or females with infertility. Thirdly, 46.3% of respondents agreed and 20.4% disagreed with “offspring have the right to know their origin”. Those who disagreed were primarily in the 50–59 year age group of both genders, and disagreement was significantly higher in the infertility group compared with non-infertility group. Conclusion In this study, public attitudes were affected by gender, age, and experience of infertility. These study findings are important in understanding the attitude towards third-party reproduction and disclosure to the offspring. Respondents having indecisive attitudes were >30%, which might indicate an increased requirement for information and education to enhance the discussion on the ethical consensus on third-party reproduction in Japan.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Naoko Yamamoto
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tokyo, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Tetsuya Hirata
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tokyo, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
- * E-mail:
| | - Gentaro Izumi
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tokyo, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Akari Nakazawa
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tokyo, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Shinya Fukuda
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tokyo, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Kazuaki Neriishi
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tokyo, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Tomoko Arakawa
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tokyo, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Masashi Takamura
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tokyo, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Miyuki Harada
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tokyo, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yasushi Hirota
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tokyo, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Kaori Koga
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tokyo, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Osamu Wada-Hiraike
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tokyo, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Tomoyuki Fujii
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tokyo, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Minoru Irahara
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tokushima University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Tokushima, Japan
| | - Yutaka Osuga
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tokyo, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
|
18
|
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
|
19
|
Abstract
When intended parents choose to have donor sperm treatment (DST), this may entail wide-ranging and long-lasting psychosocial implications related to the social parent not having a genetic tie with the child, how to disclose donor-conception and future donor contact. Counselling by qualified professionals is recommended to help intended parents cope with these implications. The objective of this study is to present findings and insights about how counsellors execute their counselling practices. We performed a qualitative study that included 13 counsellors working in the 11 clinics offering DST in the Netherlands. We held a focus group discussion and individual face-to-face semi-structured interviews, which were fully transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis. The counsellors combined screening for eligibility and guidance within one session. They acted according to their individual knowledge and clinical experience and had different opinions on the issues they discussed with intended parents, which resulted in large practice variations. The counsellors were dependent on the admission policies of the clinics, which were mainly limited to regulating access to psychosocial counselling, which also lead to a variety of counselling practices. This means that evidence-based guidelines on counselling in DST need to be developed to provide consistent counselling with less practice variation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marja Visser
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Centre for Reproductive Medicine, Academic Medical Centre Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Trudie Gerrits
- Faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Sociology and Anthropology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Fulco van der Veen
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Centre for Reproductive Medicine, Academic Medical Centre Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Monique Mochtar
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Centre for Reproductive Medicine, Academic Medical Centre Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Goedeke S, Daniels K. We wanted to choose us: how embryo donors choose recipients for their surplus embryos. J Reprod Infant Psychol 2018. [PMID: 29517344 DOI: 10.1080/02646838.2018.1424324] [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: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study aimed to explore factors affecting donors' choice of recipients for their surplus embryos in the New Zealand context of conditional, known donations. BACKGROUND Internationally, embryo donation has a low uptake in spite of large numbers of cryopreserved embryos. Possible reasons include a lack of knowledge about and concern for the future welfare of the resultant offspring. In New Zealand, donors and recipients meet prior to donation and legislation supports disclosure and access to genetic knowledge. METHOD Twenty-two embryo donors (10 couples, two individuals) were interviewed between March 2012 and February 2013 about their experiences of donation and factors affecting their donation. Interview data were analysed thematically. RESULTS In the interests of the welfare of the child resulting from donation, donors were invested in choosing recipients who would make suitable parents. They attempted to choose recipients similar to themselves, as well as those that they trusted to disclose the manner of conception and facilitate agreed-upon information exchange and contact. CONCLUSION The interest of donors in ensuring offspring well-being may lend support to conditional forms of open donation, allowing for assessment of recipients' suitability to parent, and for negotiation around information exchange and contact.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Goedeke
- a Department of Psychology , Auckland University of Technology , Auckland , New Zealand
| | - K Daniels
- b School of Social Work and Human Services , University of Canterbury , Christchurch , New Zealand
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
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
|
22
|
Pennings G. Reply: disclosure and donor-conceived children. Hum Reprod 2017; 32:1537-1538. [PMID: 28541402 DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dex108] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 05/08/2017] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Guido Pennings
- Department of Philosophy, Ghent University-Bioethics Institute Ghent, Blandijnberg 2, Gent B-9000, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
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
|
24
|
Affiliation(s)
- Susan Golombok
- Centre for Family Research, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| |
Collapse
|