To know or not to know? Dilemmas for women receiving unknown oocyte donation

Human Reproduction

Volumn 27, Issue 7, 2012, Pages 2067-2075

  Stuart Smith, S J ^a,b   Smith, J A ^c   Scott, E J ^d  

^a HERTFORDSHIRE PARTNERSHIP UNIVERSITY NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^b TAVISTOCK CLINIC   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^d Lister Fertility Clinic   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

assisted conception counselling; decision making; IVF; oocyte donation; qualitative

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; DONOR; EMOTION; FEMALE; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HUMAN; INFORMATION; INFORMATION SEEKING; MOTHER; OOCYTE DONATION; PRECONCEPTION INJURY;

EID: 84863566255     PISSN: 02681161     EISSN: 14602350     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/humrep/des116     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Abdalla HI, Shenfield F, Latarche E. Statutory information for the children born of oocyte donation in the UK: what will they be told in 2008? Hum Reprod 1998;13:1106-1109. (Pubitemid 28239230)
2. Ahuja KK, Mostyn BJ, Simons EG. Egg sharing and egg donation: attitudes of British egg donors and recipients. Hum Reprod 1997;12:2845-2852. (Pubitemid 28031761)
3. Applegarth L, Goldberg NC, Cholst I, McGoff N, Fantini D, Zellers N, Black A, Rosenwaks Z. Families created through ovum donation: a preliminary investigation of obstetrical outcome and psychological adjustment. J Assist Reprod Genet 1995;12:574-580.
4. Baetens P, Devroey P, Camus M, Van Steirteghem AC, Ponjaert-Kristoffersen I. Counselling couples and donors for oocyte donation: the decision to use either known or anonymous oocytes. Hum Reprod 2000;15:476-484. (Pubitemid 30076736)
5. Becker G. The Elusive Embryo: How Men and Women Approach New Reproductive Technologies. Berkley: University of California Press, 2000.
6. Bertrand-Servais M, Letur-Konirsch H, Raoul-Duval A, Frydman R. Psychological considerations of anonymous oocyte donation. Hum Reprod 1993;8:874-879. (Pubitemid 23193681)
7. Blyth E, Crawshaw M, Daniels K. Policy formation in gamete donation and egg sharing in the UK- a critical appraisal. Soc Sci Med 2004; 59:2617-2626. (Pubitemid 39345766)
8. Brinich P. Adoption ambivalence and mourning: clinical and theoretical inter-relationships. Adoption Fostering 1990;14:6-17.
9. Brocki JM, Wearden AJ. A critical evaluation of the use of interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) in health psychology. Psychol Health 2006;21:87-108. (Pubitemid 43024354)
10. Bruner J. Actual Minds, Possible Worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1986.
11. Cook R, Golombok S, Bish A, Murray C. Disclosure of donor insemination: parental attitudes. Am J Orthopsychiatry 1995;65:549-559.
12. DeLacey S. Parent identity and 'virtual' children: why patients discard rather than donate unused embryos. Hum Reprod 2005;20:1661-1669.
13. Duncan B, Hart G, Scoular A, Bigrigg A. Qualitative analysis of psychosocial impact of diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis: implications for screening. Br Med J 2001;322:195-199. (Pubitemid 32116161)
14. Greenfeld DA, Greenfeld DG, Mazure CM, Keefe DL, Olive DL. Do attitudes toward disclosure in donor oocyte recipients predict the use of anonymous versus directed donation? Fertil Steril 1998; 79:1009-1014. (Pubitemid 28546223)
15. Hallebone EL. Non-genetic mothers and their 'own' children: infertility and IVF donor birth. Aust J Soc Issues 1991;25:122-136.
16. Heinemann-Kuschinsky E, Davis S, Brochard E, Vasilenko P. Assessment of recipient patients concerns and feelings associated with anonymous oocyte donation. Fertil Steril 1995;64:251-253.
17. Hershberger PE. Recipients of oocyte donation: an integrative review. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 2004;33:610-621.
18. Hershberger P, Klock S, Barnes R. Disclosure decisions about pregnant women who received donor oocytes; a phenomenological study. Fertil Steril 2007;87:288-296. (Pubitemid 46176920)
19. HFEA. Human Fertilsation and Embryology Authority Regulations: Disclosure of Information. London: H.M.S.O, 2004.
20. Hughes EG, De Jean D. Cross-border fertility services in North America: a survey of Canadian and American providers. Fertil Steril 2010;94:e1.
21. Josephs LS, Grill E, Crone K, Applegarth L, Cholst L, Rosenwalls Z. Sister ovum donation: psychological outcomes. Fertil Steril 2004;82:102.
22. Kirkland A, Power M, Burton G, Baber R, Studd J, Abdalla A. Comparison of attitudes of donors and recipients to oocyte donation. Hum Reprod 1992;7:355-357.
23. Kirkman M. Infertile women and the narrative work of mourning: barriers to the revision of autobiographical narratives of motherhood. Narrative Inq 2003;13:243-262.
24. Klock SC, Greenfeld DA. Parents' knowledge about the donors and their attitudes toward disclosure in oocyte donation. Hum Reprod 2004; 19:1575-1579. (Pubitemid 38997184)
25. Konrad M. Nameless Relations: Anonymity, Melanesia and Reproductive Gift Exchange between British Ova Donors and Recipients. New York: Berghahn Books, 2005.
26. Laruelle C, Place I, Demeestere I, Englert Y, Delbaere A. Anonymity and secrecy options of recipient couples and donors, and ethnic origin influence in three types of oocyte donation. Hum Reprod 2011;26:382-390.
27. Lessor R. All in the family: social processes in ovarian egg donation between sisters. Sociol Health Ill 1993;15:393-413.
28. Lindheim SR, Kavic SR, Sauer MV. Understanding differences in the perception of anonymous parties: a comparison between gamete donors and their recipients. J Assist Reprod Genet 2000;17:127-129.
29. Lorbach C. Experiences of Donor Conception. London: Jessica Kingsley, 2003.
30. Mahlstedt PP, Probasco KA. Sperm donors: their attitudes toward providing medical and psychological information for recipient couples and donor offspring. Fertil Steril 1991;56:747-753.
31. Murray C, Golombok S. To tell or not to tell: the decision-making process of egg donation parents. Hum Fertil 2003;6:89-95. (Pubitemid 37336644)
32. Pennings G. The right to choose your donor: a step towards commercialisation or a step towards empowering the patient? Hum Reprod 2000;15:508-514.
33. Pennings G. Legal harmonization and reproductive tourism in Europe. Hum Reprod 2004;19:2689-2694. (Pubitemid 40028934)
34. Pennings G, Autin C, Decleer W, Delbaere A, Delbeke L, Delvigne A, De Neubourg D, Devroey P, Dhont M, D'Hooghe T et al. Cross-border reproductive care in Belguim. Hum Reprod 2009;24:3108-3118.
35. Pettee D, Weckstein LN. A survey of parental attitudes toward oocyte donation. Hum Reprod 1993;8:1963-1965. (Pubitemid 23337166)
36. Provoost V, Pennings G, De Sutter P, Gerris A, Van de Velde A, De Lissnyder E, Dhont M. Infertility patients' beliefs about their embryos and their disposition preferences. Hum Reprod 2009;24:896-905.
37. Rodino IS, Burton PJ, Sanders KA. Donor information considered important to donors, recipients and offspring: an Australian perspective. Reprod Biomed Online 2011;22:303-311.
38. Rosenthal JL. Psychological aspects of care. In: Sauer MV (ed). Principles of Oocyte and Embryo Donation. New York: Springer, 1998, 167-208.
39. Sandelowski M, Harris BG, Black BP. Relinquishing Infertility: the work of pregnancy for infertile couples. Qual Health Res 1992;2: 282-301.
40. Shenfield F, de Mouzon J, Pennings G, Ferraretti AP, Nyboe-Anderson A, de Wert G, Goossens V. Cross border reproductive care in six European countries. Hum Reprod 2010;25:1361-1368.
41. Smith JA. Reflecting on the development of interpretative phenomenological analysis and its contribution to research on psychology. Qual Res Psychol 2004;1:39-54.
42. Smith JA, Osborn M. Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In: Smith JA (ed). Qualitative Psychology. London: Sage, 2008.
43. Smith JA, Michie S, Stephenson M, Quarrell O. Risk perception and decision making processes in candidates for genetic testing for Huntington's disease: an interpretative phenomenological analysis. J Health Psychol 2002;7:131-144. (Pubitemid 34241882)
44. Smith JA, Flowers P, Larkin M. Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis: Theory, Method and Research. London: Sage, 2009.
45. Snowden R, Mitchell GD. The Artificial Family. London: Allen & Unwin, 1981.
46. Snowden R, Snowden E. The Gift of A Child: A Guide to Donor Insemination. England: University of Exeter Press, 1993.
47. Thorn P. Recipient counselling for donor insemination. In: Covington SN, Burns LH (eds). Infertility Counselling: A Comprehensive Handbook, 2nd edition. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
48. Touroni E, Coyle A. Decision-making in planned lesbian parenting: an interpretative phenomenological analysis. J Community Appl Soc 2002; 12:194-209. (Pubitemid 37282529)
49. Treacher A. Narrative and fantasy in adoption. In: Treacher A, Katz I (eds). The Dynamics of Adoption: Social and Personal Perspectives. London: Jessica Kingsley, 2000, 11-26.
50. Treacher A, Katz I (eds). The Dynamics of Adoption: Social and Personal Perspectives. London: Jessica Kingsley, 2000.
51. Turner AJ, Coyle A. What does it mean to be a donor offspring? The identity experiences of adults conceived by donor insemination and the implications for counselling and therapy. Hum Reprod 2000; 15:2041-2051.
52. Van den Akker O. A review of family donor constructs: current research and future directions. Hum Reprod Update 2006;12:91-101.
53. Vercollone CF, Moss H, Moss R. Helping the Stork: The Choices and Challenges of Donor Insemination. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 1997.
54. Weil E, Cornet D, Sibony C, Mandelbaum J, Sala-Baroux J. Psychological aspects in anonymous and non-anonymous oocyte donation. Hum Reprod 1994;9:1344-1347. (Pubitemid 24224009)