Human Reproduction, Vol 12, 2845-2852, Copyright © 1997 by Oxford University Press
KK Ahuja, BJ Mostyn and EG Simons
The question of payment to egg donors has recently focused the attention of
both the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) and licensed
clinics. An acute shortage of egg donors and the rising costs of assisted
conception treatment are matters of grave concern to many patients. To
understand the emotional and social effects of egg sharing and egg
donation, we conducted a survey of attitudes in a group of women who had
some knowledge or experience of egg donation. A total of 750 questionnaires
were sent out of which 217 were returned within the specified time limit.
From these, 107 respondents had experience of egg donation and 110 had made
enquiries about donation. The data from these questionnaires were collated
and tabulated by the National Opinion Polls (NOP) Research Group. An
analysis of the data produced the following key findings: (i) donating or
sharing eggs is a social issue, 94% discuss it with
partners/family/friends; (ii) altruistic motives are not the prerogative of
non-patient volunteers-egg share donors felt that helping the childless was
as important as having a chance of in-vitro fertilization (IVF) for
themselves; (iii) the treatment procedure causes the most anxiety for egg
donors. The recipients were most concerned about delays, donor
characteristics and how the eggs were allocated; (iv) most respondents
(65%) with prior experience of egg sharing would do it again - 63% of egg
share donors, 72% of egg share recipients; (v) cash rewards to egg donors
and outright advertising for donors were rejected by 64 and 62% of the
sample respectively; and (vi) counselling was highly valued and there were
no instances of 'shattered lives' after treatment. The findings do not
support the recently announced intentions of the HFEA to disallow payment
to gamete donors on the grounds of devalued consent. There is no precedent
in modern medicine for egg sharing. The patients surveyed drew a clear
distinction between egg sharing and financial rewards. As long as egg
donation is not covered by the National Health Service, it is fairer to
offer egg sharing than to refuse treatment to those unable to pay.
ARTICLES
Egg sharing and egg donation: attitudes of British egg donors and recipients
Cromwell IVF and Fertility Centre, Cromwell Hospital, London, UK.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  S. Purewal and O.B.A. van den Akker Systematic review of oocyte donation: investigating attitudes, motivations and experiences Hum. Reprod. Update, May 14, 2009; (2009) dmp018v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. Blyth and L. Frith The UK's gamete donor `crisis' - a critical analysis Critical Social Policy, February 1, 2008; 28(1): 74 - 95. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Yee, J. A. Hitkari, and E. M. Greenblatt A follow-up study of women who donated oocytes to known recipient couples for altruistic reasons Hum. Reprod., July 1, 2007; 22(7): 2040 - 2050. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
O. van den Akker A review of family donor constructs: Current research and future directions Hum. Reprod. Update, March 1, 2006; 12(2): 91 - 101. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Blyth Subsidized IVF: the development of 'egg sharing' in the UK Hum. Reprod., December 1, 2002; 17(12): 3254 - 3259. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Murray and S. Golombok Oocyte and semen donation: a survey of UK licensed centres Hum. Reprod., October 1, 2000; 15(10): 2133 - 2139. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Shulman, Y. Frenkel, J. Dor, D. Levran, E. Shiff, and S. Maschiach The best donor Hum. Reprod., October 1, 1999; 14(10): 2493 - 2496. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K.K. Ahuja, E.G. Simons, and R.G. Edwards Money, morals and medical risks: conflicting notions underlying the recruitment of egg donors Hum. Reprod., February 1, 1999; 14(2): 279 - 284. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|