University students' opinion on gamete donor identification regimes

PURPOSE

This study aims to evaluate the opinion of university students about the identification or nonidentification of gamete donation and the probability of donation according to the different regimes.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional observational study based on an online anonymous survey including questions about sociodemographic data, reasons for considering donations, information about the donation process and legislation, and their opinions about the different regimes and how they would influence donations.

RESULTS

In total, 1393 valid responses were obtained, with a mean age of 24.0 years (SD = 4.8), most of the respondents being female (68.5%), living in a relationship (56.7%), and without children (88.4%). The main reasons for considering donation would be altruism and monetary compensation. Overall, it was found that participants were poorly informed about the donation procedure and legislation. Students revealed preference for nonidentified donation, and they were less likely to donate in an open identity regime.

CONCLUSION

Most university students consider themselves poorly informed about gamete donation, express a preference for nonidentified gamete donation, and would less likely donate on an open identity basis. Thus, an identified regime may be less attractive to potential donors and lead to a decrease in the availability of gamete donors.

Medical ethics when moving towards non-anonymous gamete donation: the views of donors and recipients

Drawing on the views of donors and recipients about anonymity in a country that is experiencing a transition towards non-anonymous gamete donation mandated by the Constitutional Court, we explore how the intersection between rights-based approaches and an empirical framework enhances recommendations for ethical policy and healthcare. Between July 2017 and April 2018, 69 donors and 147 recipients, recruited at the Portuguese Public Bank of Gametes, participated in this cross-sectional study. Position towards anonymity was assessed through an open-ended question in a self-report questionnaire, which was subject to content analysis. Preference for an anonymous donation regime was mentioned by 82.6% of donors and 89.8% of recipients; and all those with children. Instead of the rights-based reasoning used by the Constitutional Court, donors highlighted concerns over future relationships and recipients focused on socioethical values linked with the safeguard of safety, privacy and confidentiality. The remaining participants advocated the choice between anonymity or non-anonymity (double-track policy), invoking respect for their autonomy. The complex, diverse ethical views and reasoning of donors and recipients expand a traditionally dichotomous discussion. Their perspectives challenge the transition towards non-anonymity and international guidelines, raising awareness to the need for their involvement in the design of policies to enable choice according to their values and preferences, and of psychosocial counselling responsive to their socioethical concerns and sensitive to their parental status. Empirical frameworks complement rights-based approaches to uphold justice, fairness and equal respect, and to incorporate utility, beneficence and non-maleficence in policymaking and healthcare in the transition towards non-anonymity.

Motivations and Attitudes of Men Towards Sperm Donation: Whom to Donate and Why?

BACKGROUND

The widespread access to medically assisted reproduction (MAR) techniques for all women, regardless of any infertility diagnosis, has led to an increased, but as yet unmet, demand for sperm donors in Portugal. For this study, we deployed an online survey to explore men's motivations for donating and their attitudes toward anonymity and donating for specific groups.

METHOD

The study's sample comprised men who were eligible to donate sperm (N = 282). The relationships between these factors and participants' psychological and sociodemographic characteristics were also explored.

RESULTS

The results mostly indicated altruistic reasons for donating, positive attitudes toward anonymity, and a greater willingness to donate to infertile women. Overall, sexual orientation was not associated with the participants' attitudes and motivations. Age, education level, conscientiousness, empathic concern, and conservative and religious values were associated with the participants' motivations and attitudes toward sperm donation.

CONCLUSION

Recruitment campaigns should therefore consider the specific motivations, attitudes, and psychosocial characteristics of potential sperm donors. Indeed, parenthood is a universal right, so sperm donation should be encouraged, regardless of recipients' fertility status. Clear information about the identifiability of sperm donors should also be provided.