TY - JOUR
T1 - A follow-up study with oocyte donors exploring their experiences, knowledge, and attitudes about the use of their oocytes and the outcome of the donation
AU - Kalfoglou, Andrea L.
AU - Geller, Gail
N1 - Funding Information:
Supported in part by the Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland.
Copyright:
Copyright 2006 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2000/10
Y1 - 2000/10
N2 - Objective: To learn what information oocyte donors were given and wanted to have about the use of their oocytes and the outcome of the donation. Design: In-depth interviews. Setting: Participants recruited through IVF clinics, matching agency, the Internet, word of mouth, and newspaper ads. Participant(s): Thirty-three former oocyte donors and six women preparing to donate. Intervention(s): None. Main Outcome Measure(s): None. Result(s): Thirty-three former donors completed 66 donation cycles; 48 donation cycles were anonymous. Only 41% (16 of 39) of all participants were comfortable giving the recipient couple complete dispositional authority over the resulting embryos; the remainder wanted some control. One quarter did not want embryos used for research. Fifty-four percent (21 of 39) thought donation of excess embryos to another couple was acceptable, but one third wanted to be informed. Of the 25 anonymous donors, 6 learned the outcome of the donation; 14 others wanted to know. All hoped the donation was successful. Conclusion(s): Because oocyte donors' need for information varies, clinics should consider being more flexible in their disclosure policies. Disclosure about the possible uses of donor oocytes or embryos should be mandatory. Findings have implications for the informed consent and counseling processes. (C) 2000 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.
AB - Objective: To learn what information oocyte donors were given and wanted to have about the use of their oocytes and the outcome of the donation. Design: In-depth interviews. Setting: Participants recruited through IVF clinics, matching agency, the Internet, word of mouth, and newspaper ads. Participant(s): Thirty-three former oocyte donors and six women preparing to donate. Intervention(s): None. Main Outcome Measure(s): None. Result(s): Thirty-three former donors completed 66 donation cycles; 48 donation cycles were anonymous. Only 41% (16 of 39) of all participants were comfortable giving the recipient couple complete dispositional authority over the resulting embryos; the remainder wanted some control. One quarter did not want embryos used for research. Fifty-four percent (21 of 39) thought donation of excess embryos to another couple was acceptable, but one third wanted to be informed. Of the 25 anonymous donors, 6 learned the outcome of the donation; 14 others wanted to know. All hoped the donation was successful. Conclusion(s): Because oocyte donors' need for information varies, clinics should consider being more flexible in their disclosure policies. Disclosure about the possible uses of donor oocytes or embryos should be mandatory. Findings have implications for the informed consent and counseling processes. (C) 2000 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.
KW - Embryo research
KW - Informed consent
KW - Oocyte donation
KW - Qualitative research
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0033795416&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0033795416&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S0015-0282(00)01489-8
DO - 10.1016/S0015-0282(00)01489-8
M3 - Article
C2 - 11020503
AN - SCOPUS:0033795416
VL - 74
SP - 660
EP - 667
JO - Fertility and Sterility
JF - Fertility and Sterility
SN - 0015-0282
IS - 4
ER -