Skip Navigation


Hum. Reprod. Advance Access originally published online on January 9, 2009
Human Reproduction 2009 24(4):896-905; doi:10.1093/humrep/den486
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF )
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
24/4/896    most recent
den486v1
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in Hum. Reprod.
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Provoost, V.
Right arrow Articles by Dhont, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Provoost, V.
Right arrow Articles by Dhont, M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Infertility patients' beliefs about their embryos and their disposition preferences

V. Provoost1,2,5, G. Pennings1, P. De Sutter3, J. Gerris3, A. Van de Velde3, E. De Lissnyder4 and M. Dhont3

1 Bioethics Institute Ghent (BIG), Ghent University, Blandijnberg 2 B-9000 Ghent, Belgium 2 Postdoctoral Fellow of the Research Foundation – Flanders (FWO) 3 University Hospital Ghent, Infertility Centre, Ghent, Belgium 4 Ghent University, Department of Experimental-Clinical and Healthy Psychology, Ghent, Belgium

5 Correspondence address. Email: veerle.provoost{at}ugent.be

BACKGROUND: Little research has been done on how beliefs of infertility patients about their embryos are related to their disposition decisions. The objective of this study was to describe how patients speak about their embryos, in moral (e.g. status) and non-moral terms, and to investigate how patients' narratives are related to their disposition preferences.

METHODS: In-depth interviews based on the method of interpretative phenomenological analysis were conducted with patients undergoing IVF/ICSI treatment between May and July 2006.

RESULTS: Seven couples and 11 female patients were interviewed. Six major themes emerged from the narratives of the participants when they spoke about their embryos: (i) a medical-technical perspective; (ii) feelings; (iii) genetic link to oneself and/or one's partner; (iv) symbolic meaning of the relationship between the infertile partners; (v) moral status and (vi) instrumental value. All but two participants spontaneously considered the embryo disposition options as a two-stage decision sequence. In the first step, they considered donation to another couple for reproductive purposes. At this stage, the presence of the themes ‘genetic link’ and ‘symbol of the relationship’ was linked with a clear reluctance to donate. In the second step of the decision-making process, the option of donation for research and discarding were considered. At this stage, participants' confidence in medical science and the instrumental value they attached to the embryo were related to their decisions.

CONCLUSIONS: Patients' conceptualization of their embryos plays an important role in embryo disposition decisions. Our research showed that patients deal with these decisions in a two-stage decision sequence.

Key words: embryo disposition/decision-making/qualitative research

Submitted on October 29, 2008; resubmitted on December 6, 2008; accepted on December 15, 2008.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?

Related articles in Hum. Reprod.:

Editor's Choice
André Van Steirteghem
Hum. Reprod. 2009 24: 763. [Extract] [Full Text]  





Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.