Human Reproduction, Vol. 18, No. 1, 212-216,
January 2003
© 2003 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology
Recruitment and motivation of semen providers in Sweden
1 Department of Clinical Sciences, Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital, Umeå, Sweden, 2 Department of Social Work, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand and 3 IVF unit, Sophiahemmet Hospital and Division of Women and Child Health, Karolinska Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden 4 To whom correspondence should be addressed at: Department of Clinical Sciences, Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital, SE-901 85 Umeå, Sweden. e-mail: othon.lalos{at}obgyn.umu.se
BACKGROUND: Legislation in Sweden requires that semen providers are prepared to be identified to offspring (at maturity) should this be requested. This study presents views of semen providers in Sweden regarding factors associated with their recruitment and motivation. METHODS: All semen providers (n = 30) in two clinics in different parts of Sweden participated in a questionnaire survey and both quantitative and qualitative data are reported. RESULTS: While there were some important demographic differences between the two clinic populations, there was total agreement that the desire to assist infertile couples was the sole or main motivating factor in becoming a semen provider. Monetary reward was not reported by respondents to be an important motivator, although at least 50% of the providers in both clinics thought that payment should be made and reimbursement of expenses was reported as being important. Men responded to both advertising and personal experiences or contacts they had with infertile couples. The involvement and support of the semen provider’s partner was regarded as important. CONCLUSIONS: Semen providers can be recruited within a system that requires them to be prepared to be identified to offspring in the future. The characteristics of such providers vary, but are typified by a strong desire to assist infertile couples.
Key words: motivation/payment/recruitment/semen providers/Sweden
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  J. Gao, E.S. Gao, Q. Yang, M. Walker, J.Q. Wu, W.J. Zhou, and S.W. Wen Semen quality in a residential, geographic and age representative sample of healthy Chinese men Hum. Reprod., February 1, 2007; 22(2): 477 - 484. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P.M.W. Janssens, A.H.M. Simons, R.J. van Kooij, E. Blokzijl, and G.A.J. Dunselman A new Dutch Law regulating provision of identifying information of donors to offspring: background, content and impact Hum. Reprod., April 1, 2006; 21(4): 852 - 856. [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]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Daniels, E. Blyth, M. Crawshaw, and R. Curson Short Communication: Previous semen donors and their views regarding the sharing of information with offspring Hum. Reprod., June 1, 2005; 20(6): 1670 - 1675. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J.E. Scheib, M. Riordan, and S. Rubin Adolescents with open-identity sperm donors: reports from 12-17 year olds Hum. Reprod., January 1, 2005; 20(1): 239 - 252. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Muller, E. De La Rochebrochard, C. Labbe-Decleves, P. Jouannet, L. Bujan, R. Mieusset, D. Le Lannou, J.F. Guerin, M. Benchaib, R. Slama, et al. Selection bias in semen studies due to self-selection of volunteers Hum. Reprod., December 1, 2004; 19(12): 2838 - 2844. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. S. Svanberg, C. Lampic, T. Bergh, and O. Lundkvist Characterization of potential oocyte donors in Sweden Hum. Reprod., October 1, 2003; 18(10): 2205 - 2215. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|