Skip Navigation



Hum. Reprod. Advance Access published online on January 12, 2006
Human Reproduction, doi:10.1093/humrep/dei468
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
21/5/1325    most recent
dei468v1
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 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 Zweifel, J. E.
Right arrow Articles by Lindheim, S. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Zweifel, J. E.
Right arrow Articles by Lindheim, S. R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. 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
Received September 14, 2005
Accepted November 17, 2005

Article

Comparative assessment of pre- and post-donation attitudes towards potential oocyte and embryo disposition and management among ovum donors in an oocyte donation programme

Julianne E. Zweifel 1, Meredith A. Rathert 1, Susan C. Klock 2, Heidi P. Walaski 1, Elizabeth A. Pritts 1, David L. Olive 1, and Steven R. Lindheim 1 *

1 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA
2 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Northwestern University Medical School, Chicago, IL, USA

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
Steven R. Lindheim, E-mail: srlindheim{at}wisc.edu


  Abstract

BACKGROUND: In anonymous oocyte donation programmes, the disposition of retrieved oocytes and subsequent embryo management are at the discretion of the IVF programme and the oocyte recipients, as donors waive all rights following their donation. Nonetheless, donors are routinely made aware of ways in which oocytes and resulting embryos may be used and elect to proceed with the process even in the presence of reservations to some clinical scenarios before their donation. The aim of our study was to examine oocyte donors’ attitudes to oocyte and embryo disposition and management and how initial reservations change over the course of the donation process. METHODS: Oocyte donors in a university-based IVF programme were asked about their willingness to donate in relation to various clinical scenarios during the initial screening interview and at the post-donation exit interview. Results were tabulated as ‘yes’ or ‘no’. RESULTS: At the pre-donation interview, 72% of donor candidates expressed reservations to one or more clinical scenarios. More reservations were expressed at the post-donation interview compared with the pre-donation interview. The greatest reservations were donating to recipients >50 years of age (P < 0.05). Despite this, 97% of donors were willing to donate again. CONCLUSION: Oocyte donors’ attitudes towards various clinical scenarios changed following their donation, reflecting overall greater reservations following the donation process. Although speculative, donors may be more willing to assert their opinions or donor attitudes become more restrictive.

Keywords: oocyte donor attitudes/oocyte disposition.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Hum Reprod UpdateHome page
S. Purewal and O.B.A. van den Akker
Systematic review of oocyte donation: investigating attitudes, motivations and experiences
Hum. Reprod. Update, September 1, 2009; 15(5): 499 - 515.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum Reprod UpdateHome page
O. B.A. van den Akker
Psychosocial aspects of surrogate motherhood
Hum. Reprod. Update, January 1, 2007; 13(1): 53 - 62.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


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.