Gamete Donation Should Be Anonymous

2021 ◽  
pp. 165-166
Author(s):  
Guido Pennings
Keyword(s):  
2004 ◽  
Vol 59 (12) ◽  
pp. 2617-2626 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Blyth ◽  
Marilyn Crawshaw ◽  
Ken Daniels

2017 ◽  
Vol 216 (1) ◽  
pp. S524-S525
Author(s):  
Lise Preaubert ◽  
Aurelie Vincent ◽  
Pietro Santulli ◽  
Vanessa Gayet ◽  
Francois Goffinet ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
N Figueras-Puigderrajols ◽  
A Ballesteros ◽  
D Guerra

Abstract Study question The present study aims to explore infertility-related psychosocial outcomes, including fertility quality of life (QoL), as well as anxiety and depression levels, in women diagnosed with infertility. Summary answer Differences on fertility-related QoL appeared when comparing treatment types (gamete donation vs own gamete). Furthermore, statistically significant associations were found between QoL and anxious-depressive symptomatology. What is known already Those who wish to have children and do not achieve their objective just like other peers can see their goals and expectations with pessimism, generating concern and a series of negative emotions. Several psychological implications of infertility have been described, such as increased levels of stress, anxiety, depression, decreased self-esteem, mood and hope, or poor relationship adjustment. The emotional impact of infertility in people’s life cycle can be so strong that reducing it only to biological aspects would lead to a dangerous situation of neglect. For this reason, QoL assessment in ART becomes an important need. Study design, size, duration FertiQol stands as the most widely used tool to assess infertility-related QoL, overcoming the limitations of other instruments that only target specific medical conditions. The present is a multi-site cross-sectional study over patients with infertility (n = 104), aiming to explore their fertility-QoL, as well as their anxiety and depression levels, which are symptoms that have been previously associated.Questionnaire administration, and sociodemographic and medical data gathering took place between January 2019 and December 2020. Participants/materials, setting, methods Participants were 104 female patients (M.age= 39.8) undergoing or expecting a fertility treatment. The FertiQol Spanish version was administered through mobile app, and its paper version distributed at medical/psychological appointments. QoL was self-reported through FertiQol, assessing the influence of infertility problems in various areas (e.g. impact on self-esteem, emotions, general health, family, partners, social relationships, work, life projects...). Additionally, HADS (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) was provided as a measurement of anxiety and depression levels. Main results and the role of chance Regarding treatments, 50.6% of participants were currently undergoing gamete donation while 44.3% were undergoing treatments that involved using their own gametes. After comparing QoL between these treatment types, results showed that patients who underwent egg donation, compared to those who used their own eggs, reported statistically significantly lower scores of QoL in the Social Subscale (p = .03), but not in the other psychological outcomes. Also, statistically significant negative correlations were found between HADS and all core FertiQol subscales (p< .05). Results are consistent with previous studies showing similar associations between fertility QoL and anxiety and depression, as well as with increased psychological negative implications of gamete donation. The majority of participants reported non-pathological scores of anxiety and depression when considering the cut off value of 8 for HADS, thus suggesting the presence of a relatively healthy sample. The number of treatments that patients had previously taken and the years of infertility were not associated with any of the psychological variables. Limitations, reasons for caution Some limitations to consider are presence of co-morbid diagnosis, differences in medication, or patient’s cultural backgrounds.Also, conclusions should be interpreted cautiously since the design doesn’t allow causal inferences. Further investigations should consider a continuous assessment to explore changes in psychological well-being at different points of intervention, specially with gamete donation. Wider implications of the findings: The great advantage we’ve seen so far when using FertiQol is the possibility to identify more accurately the true impact on other aspects of patient’s well-being besides the emotional area.ART professionals, including psychologists and counselors,will have more information within a small amount of time about QoL when using this tool. Trial registration number 1503-BCN–019-DG


2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
J Simas ◽  
D Braga ◽  
A Setti ◽  
R Melamed ◽  
A Iaconell ◽  
...  

Abstract Study question Do couples undergoing assisted reproduction treatments (ART) have a different perception of anonymous vs identity-release gamete donation than a population interested in the subject? Summary answer Compared with a population interested in the subject, more couples undergoing ART believed the child shouldn’t be given information that would identify the gamete-donor. What is known already Recent research has investigated the psychological well-being of parents and children born through gamete donation, focusing on the possibility of having the donor’s identity revealed. Gamete donors have traditionally been anonymous to recipients and offspring; however, there is a global trend towards programs using donors that are identifiable to the resulting offspring at maturity. While some countries only allow the use of identity-release egg donation, others only allow anonymous-donation, and in some countries both types of donation are practiced. However, the attitudes concerning anonymous vs identity-release gamete donation, in a country where only anonymous donation is allowed, are still unknown. Study design, size, duration This cross-sectional study was performed from 01/Sep/2020 to 15/Dec/2020. For that, surveys through online-platforms were conducted, including either patients undergoing ART, (ART-group, n = 358) or those interested in the subject, who accessed the website of a university-affiliated IVF-center (interested-group, n = 122). Participants in the ART-group were invited via e-mail, with a cover-letter outlining the survey and a link to access it and participants in the interested-group accessed the questionnaire via website. Participants/materials, setting, methods The survey collected information on demographic characteristics and the participant’s attitudes towards anonymity of gamete donors. The questions were: (i) In the case of children conceived through ART, do you believe that revealing the method of conception may affect the relationship between children and their parents? (ii) Once the method of conception is revealed, do you believe that the child has the right to know the gamete donor? (iii) If yes, when? Main results and the role of chance Most of the participants answered that the relationship between children and parents wouldn’t be affected by the child’s knowledge of the origin of their conception, regardless of the group (83.6% vs 82.7%, for ART-group and interested-group, respectively, p = 0.868). Most participants in the ART-group answered that the sperm donor identity shouldn’t be revealed to the child, while only half of the interested-group stated the same (65.4% vs 50.8%, p = 0.044). The same result was observed when participants were asked if the oocyte donor should be identifiable (64.8% vs 50.8%, p = 0.050). When asked when the donor’s identity should be revealed to the child, no significant differences were noted in the responses among the groups (p = 0.868). Most of the participants who believe that the child has the right of learning the donor’s identity, stated that “the donor’s identity should be revealed if the child questions its biological origin” (67.2% vs 67.5%, for ART-group and interested-group, respectively). “Since birth” was the second most common response, (21.0% vs 19.7%, for ART-group and interested-group, respectively), while “when the child turns 18 years-old” (9.2% vs 11.2%, for ART-group and interested-group, respectively), and “sometime during teenage years” (2.5% vs 2.4%, for ART-group and interested-group, respectively) were less common answers. Limitations, reasons for caution Lack of adequate opportunities to conduct face to face interview and lack of knowledge of the real state of the website participants, concerning infertility or being involved in ART. The retrospective nature of the study and the small sample size may also be reasons for caution, Wider implications of the findings: It has been discussed that, whether or not children or parents are harmed by knowing their biological origins, donor offspring have the right to know. However, when facing the situation, couples undergoing ART would argue that in case of gamete donation, there are reasons for not telling the child. Trial registration number Not applicable


Author(s):  
I. Glenn Cohen

Gamete donor anonymity has become an increasingly active area of legislative, bioethical, and empirical interest over the last decade or so. This chapter begins by detailing the very different status of gamete donor anonymity, contrasting the United States (where the law does not prohibit it) with the rest of the world (where it has been largely prohibited by law) and examining the effects of these policies. The chapter then examines the major arguments that have been offered in favor of and against mandating nonanonymous gamete donation. In particular, it focuses on the effects of removing anonymity on supply and arguments in favor of ending sperm donor anonymity based on the welfare of donor-conceived children or rights claims by them. The chapter also more briefly considers ethical and legal issues related to donor compensation, accidental incest, information reciprocity between donors and recipients, and reproductive tourism.


2019 ◽  
Vol 41 (6) ◽  
pp. 831-852
Author(s):  
Laura Halcomb

This paper examines how gender beliefs are embedded in the organizational practices of the reproductive market. Third party reproduction blurs boundaries between familial and non-familial members, making gamete banks and donation agencies important sites for studying the construction of family. Cultural beliefs about gender are implicated in the discourses and practices of these organizations, which shape and constrain the experiences and options for both gamete donors and recipient families. To evaluate this process, I conducted qualitative analyses on the recruitment materials of all of sperm banks, egg banks, and egg donation agencies in the United States. My analysis demonstrates that the reproductive market still relies on heteronormative assumptions of family. However, the extent to which these organizations facilitate participation in new, non-normative family forms breaks down along gendered lines, where sperm donors have more freedom, status, and potential to create relationships with recipient families than egg donors.


2020 ◽  
pp. 13-19
Author(s):  
L. Chalova ◽  
V. Lokshin ◽  
A. Guseva ◽  
A. Kinzhibayev

This world literature review tries to determine the significance of the gamete donation in the field of assisted reproductive technologies as well as the availability of treatment methods using donation in in vitro fertilization programs. Gamete donation is regulated by every country's national legislation system, and quite often the laws vary between the states. There are practically no universal standards and/or rules in this area, which, in turn, leads to an ambivalent reaction towards reproductive practices.


2010 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Scott Sills ◽  
Lyubov O Mykhaylyshyn ◽  
Ulyana S Dorofeyeva ◽  
David J Walsh ◽  
Umme Salma ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 853-860 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Isaksson ◽  
A. Skoog Svanberg ◽  
G. Sydsjö ◽  
A. Thurin-Kjellberg ◽  
P.-O. Karlström ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document