Skip header and navigation

2 records – page 1 of 1.

Attitudes about donor information differ greatly between IVF couples using their own gametes and those receiving or donating oocytes or sperm.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature280849
Source
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2016 Jun;33(6):703-10
Publication Type
Article
Date
Jun-2016
Author
Agneta Skoog Svanberg
G. Sydsjö
M. Bladh
C. Lampic
Source
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2016 Jun;33(6):703-10
Date
Jun-2016
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Access to Information - legislation & jurisprudence - psychology
Adolescent
Adult
Attitude
Family Characteristics
Female
Fertilization in Vitro - legislation & jurisprudence - psychology
Humans
Longitudinal Studies
Male
Oocyte Donation - legislation & jurisprudence - psychology
Spermatozoa
Sweden
Tissue Donors - legislation & jurisprudence - psychology
Abstract
The objective of the study is to examine attitudes towards aspects of donation treatment based on a national Swedish sample of gamete donors and couples undergoing assisted reproductive techniques (ART).
The present study was part of the Swedish study on gamete donation, a prospective longitudinal cohort study including all fertility clinics performing gamete donation in Sweden. The sample comprised 164 oocyte donors, 89 sperm donors, 251 people treated with their own gametes (in vitro fertilisation (IVF)), 213 oocyte recipients and 487 sperm recipients. A study-specific questionnaire was used.
Attitudes vary widely between couples using their own gametes for IVF and those receiving or donating oocyte or sperm. The groups differed in their responses to most questions. Oocyte and sperm donors were more likely to agree with the statements "The donor should be informed if the donation results in a child" and "Offspring should receive some information about the donor during mature adolescence" than recipients of donated gametes and couples treated with their own gametes.
Donor recipients, IVF couples and donors expressed different attitudes towards openness and information when it came to gamete donation, and those differences seemed to depend on their current reproductive situation.
Notes
Cites: Med J Aust. 2003 Feb 3;178(3):127-912558484
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2013 Sep;28(9):2432-923756704
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2004 Oct;19(10):2415-915310730
Cites: Public Underst Sci. 2009 Jan;18(1):61-7719579535
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2009 Aug;24(8):1930-819414865
Cites: Ups J Med Sci. 2013 Aug;118(3):187-9523786323
Cites: J Assist Reprod Genet. 2009 May;26(5):231-819472047
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2008 Apr;23(4):904-1118258766
Cites: Psychol Health. 2011 Sep;26(9):1113-2721929476
PubMed ID
27059774 View in PubMed
Less detail

Disclosure behaviour and intentions among 111 couples following treatment with oocytes or sperm from identity-release donors: follow-up at offspring age 1-4 years.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature121973
Source
Hum Reprod. 2012 Oct;27(10):2998-3007
Publication Type
Article
Date
Oct-2012
Author
S. Isaksson
G. Sydsjö
A. Skoog Svanberg
C. Lampic
Author Affiliation
Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University, S-751 22 Uppsala, Sweden.
Source
Hum Reprod. 2012 Oct;27(10):2998-3007
Date
Oct-2012
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Adult
Child, Preschool
Disclosure
Family Characteristics
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Heterosexuality
Humans
Infant
Insemination, Artificial, Heterologous - legislation & jurisprudence - psychology
Intention
Male
Oocyte Donation - legislation & jurisprudence - psychology
Sweden
Tissue Donors - legislation & jurisprudence
Tissue and Organ Procurement - legislation & jurisprudence
Abstract
Do heterosexual parents of young children following oocyte donation (OD) and sperm donation (SD) tell or intend to tell their offspring about the way he/she was conceived?
Following successful treatment with oocytes or sperm from identity-release donors in Sweden, almost all heterosexual couples intend to tell their offspring about the way he/she was conceived and some start the information-sharing process very early.
Although the Swedish legislation on identity-release gamete donors has been in effect since 1985, there is a discrepancy between the behaviour of donor-insemination parents and the legal intention that offspring be informed about their genetic origin. The present study contributes data on a relatively large sample of oocyte and sperm recipient couples' intended compliance with the Swedish legislation. DESIGN AND DATA COLLECTION METHOD: The present study constitutes a follow-up assessment of heterosexual couples who had given birth to a child following treatment with donated oocytes. Data collection was performed during 2007-2011; participants individually completed a questionnaire when the child was between 1 and 4 years of age.
The present study is part of the Swedish Study on Gamete Donation, a prospective longitudinal cohort study including all fertility clinics performing gamete donation in Sweden. For children conceived via OD, 107 individuals (including 52 couples and 3 individuals) agreed to participate (73% response). For children conceived via SD, the response rate was 70% (n = 122 individuals, including 59 couples and 4 individuals). Mean age of participants was 34 years (SD 4.4) and they reported a high level of education.
The majority of participants (78%) planned to tell the child about the donation, 16% had already started the information-sharing process and 6% planned not to tell their child about the donation or were undecided. Many were unsure about a suitable time to start the disclosure process and desired more information about strategies and tools for information sharing. Agreement on disclosure to offspring within the couple was related to the quality of the partner relationship. BIAS AND GENERALIZABILITY: There is a risk of selection bias, with gamete recipients preferring secrecy and non-disclosure declining study participation. The results may be regarded as partly generalizable to heterosexual couples with young children following treatment with gametes from legislatively mandated identity-release donors in an established donor programme.
Study funding by Merck Serono, The Swedish Research Council and The Family Planning Fund in Uppsala. No conflicts of interest to declare.
Notes
Cites: Fertil Steril. 2004 Mar;81(3):527-3115037397
Cites: J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2002 May-Jun;31(3):283-9312033541
Cites: J Fam Psychol. 2004 Sep;18(3):443-5215382969
Cites: Soc Sci Med. 1995 May;40(9):1213-207610427
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2005 Jan;20(1):239-5215539443
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2005 Mar;20(3):820-415677679
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2005 Mar;20(3):810-915677680
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2005 Nov;20(11):3248-5616006458
Cites: Patient Educ Couns. 2005 Dec;59(3):252-6215990268
Cites: J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2005 Dec;26(4):265-7016457422
Cites: Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2006;85(1):78-8116521685
Cites: Sociol Health Illn. 2006 Apr;28(3):261-8316573716
Cites: Hum Fertil (Camb). 2006 Jun;9(2):93-916825110
Cites: Fertil Steril. 2007 Mar;87(3):524-3317141770
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2007 Jun;22(6):1759-6817522083
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2007 Sep;22(9):2566-7117588957
Cites: Fertil Steril. 2008 Jan;89(1):179-8717678901
Cites: J Fam Nurs. 2008 Feb;14(1):33-5518281642
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2009 May;24(5):1099-10519164306
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2009 Aug;24(8):1909-1919398766
Cites: J Assist Reprod Genet. 2009 May;26(5):231-819472047
Cites: Fertil Steril. 2010 May 1;93(7):2236-4619285663
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2010 Oct;25(10):2535-4220679252
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2010 Oct;25(10):2527-3420719810
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2011 Apr;26(4):853-6021212053
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2011 Sep;26(9):2415-2421708794
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2011 Oct;26(10):2783-9021803758
Cites: J Fam Psychol. 2012 Feb;26(1):1-1022040353
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2012 Mar;27(3):779-8622252089
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2000 Sep;15(9):2041-5110967012
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2000 Sep;15(9):2052-610967013
Cites: J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2000 Dec;21(4):193-20311191166
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2001 Sep;16(9):1792-611527877
Cites: Hum Reprod. 2002 May;17(5):1407-811980773
Cites: Fertil Steril. 2004 Jun;81(6):1565-7115193478
PubMed ID
22859508 View in PubMed
Less detail