Factors contributing to parental decision-making in disclosing donor conception: A systematic review

Human Reproduction Update

Volumn 19, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 714-733

  Indekeu, A ^a   Dierickx, K ^a   Schotsmans, P ^a   Daniels, K R ^b   Rober, P ^c   D'Hooghe, T ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CANTERBURY   (New Zealand)

^c UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS LEUVEN   (Belgium)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONCEPTION; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY; DECISION MAKING; DONOR; DYNAMICS; EXTENDED FAMILY; FAMILY LIFE; HETEROSEXUALITY; HUMAN; INFERTILITY; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; LAW; LIFE CYCLE; PARENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGENY; SOCIAL LIFE; SOCIAL STIGMA; SUPPORT GROUP; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TREND STUDY;

DISCLOSURE; DONOR INSEMINATION; EMBRYO DONATION; OOCYTE DONATION; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

ATTITUDE; DECISION MAKING; DISCLOSURE; HUMANS; INSEMINATION, ARTIFICIAL, HETEROLOGOUS; MALE; OOCYTE DONATION; OOCYTES; PARENTS; SPERMATOZOA; TISSUE DONORS;

EID: 84886293237     PISSN: 13554786     EISSN: 14602369     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmt018     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Adair VA, Purdie A. Donor insemination programmes with personal donors: issues of secrecy. Hum Reprod 1996;11:2558-2563.
2. AfifiWA, Guerrero LK. Motivations underlying topic avoidance in close relationship. In: Petronio S (ed). Balancing the Secrets of Private Disclosures. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2000, 165-180.
3. Afifi TA, Steuber KR. The revelation risk model (RRM): factors that predict the revelation of secrets and the strategies used to reveal them. Commun Monogr 2009;76:144-176.
4. Afifi TA, Steuber KR. The cycle of concealment model: An examination of how secrets, and the strategies used to reveal them, affect family relationships over time. J Soc Pers Relat 2010;27:1019-1034.
5. American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM). Ethics Committee report. Informing offspring of their conception by gamete donation. Fertil Steril 2004; 81:527-531.
6. 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.
7. Baxter LA, Montgomery BM. Relating: Dialogues and Dialectics. New York, USA: Guilford, 1996.
8. Becker G, Butler A, Nachtigall RD. Resemblance talk: a challenge for parents whose children were conceived with donor gametes in the US. Soc Sci Med 2005; 61:1300-1309.
9. Blyth E, Landau R. Third Party Assisted Conception Across Cultures: Social, Legal and Ethical Perspectives, 1st edn. London, UK: Jessica Kingley Publishers, 2004.
10. Blyth E, Langridge D, Harris R. Family building in donor conception: parents' experiences of sharing information. J Reprod Infant Psychol 2010;28:116-127.
11. Boivin J, Appleton TC, Baetens P, Baron J, Bitzer J, Corrigan E, Daniels KR, Darwish J, Guerra-Diaz D, Hammar M et al. Guidelines for counselling in infertility: outline version. Hum Reprod 2001;16:1301-1304.
12. Brewaeys A, Golombok A, Naaktgeboren N, de Bruyn JK, van Hall EV. Donor insemination: Dutch parents' opinions about confidentiality and donor anonymity and the emotional adjustment of their children. Hum Reprod 1997;12:1591-1597.
13. Brewaeys A, de Bruyn JK, Louwe LA, Helmerhorst FM. Anonymous or identity-registered sperm donors? A study of Dutch recipients' choices. Human Reprod 2005;20:820-824.
14. Cook R, Golombok S, Bish A, Murray C. Disclosure of donor insemination: parental attitudes. Am J Orthopsychiatry 1995;65:549-559.
15. Daniels K. The controversy regarding privacy and disclosure amongst patients using donor gametes in assisted reproductive technology. J Assist Reprod Genet 1997; 14:373-375.
16. Daniels K. Is blood really thicker than water? Assietd reproduction and its impact on our thinking about family. J Psychosom Obstet Gynecol 2005;26:265-270.
17. Daniels KR, Lewis GM, Gillett M. Telling donor insemination offspring about their conception: the nature of couples' decision-making. Soc Sci Med 1995; 40:1213-1220.
18. Daniels K, Thorn P,Westerbrooke R. Confidence in the use of donor insemination: an evaluation of the impact of participating in a group preparation programme. Hum Fertil 2007;10:13-20.
19. Daniels K, Gillett W, Grace V. Parental information sharing with donor insemination conceived offspring: a follow-up study. Hum Reprod 2009;24:1099-1105.
20. Daniels K, Grace V, GillettW. Factors associated with parents' decisions to tell their adult offspring about the offspring's donor conception. Hum Reprod 2011; 26:2783-2790.
21. Durna EM, Bebe J, Steigrad SJ, Leader LR, GarrettDG. Donor insemination: attitudes of parents towards disclosure. Med J Aust 1997;167:256-259.
22. Golombok S, Lycett E, MacCallum F, Jadva V, Murray C, Rust J, Abdalla H, Jenkins J, Margara R. Parenting infants conceived by gamete donation. J Fam Psychol 2004; 18:443-452.
23. Gottlieb C, Lalos O, Lindblad F. Disclosure of donor insemination to the child: the impact of Swedish legislation on couples' attitudes. Hum Reprod 2000;15:2052-2056.
24. Greene K. An integrated model of health disclosure decision-making. In: Afifi TD, Afifi WA (eds). Uncertainty Information Management and Disclosure Decision. NY, USA: Routledge, 2009, 226-254.
25. Greenfeld DA, Klock SC. Disclosure decisions among known and anonymous oocyte donation recipients. Fertil Steril 2004;81:1565-1571.
26. Greenfeld A, Greenfeld D, Mazure C, Keefe D, Olive D.Doattitudestoward disclosure in donor oocyte recipients predict the use of anonymous versus direct donation? Fertil Steril 1998;70:1009-1014.
27. Hahn SJ, Craft-Rosenberg M. The disclosure decisions of parentswhoconceive children using donor eggs. JOGNN 2002;31:283-293.
28. Haimes E. Do clinicians benefit from gamete doner anonymity? Hum Reprod 1993; 8:1518-1520.
29. Hammarberg K, Carmichael M, Tinney L, Mulder A. Gamete donors' and recipients' evaluation of donor counselling: a prospective longitudinal cohort study. ANZJOG 2008;48:601-606.
30. Hershberger P, Klock SC, Barnes RB. Disclosure decisions among pregnant women who received donor oocytes: a phenomenological study. Fertil Steril 2007; 87:288-296.
31. Hudson N, Culley L, Rapport F, Johnson M, Bharadwaj A. 'Public' perceptions of gamete donation: a research review. Public Underst Sci 2009;18:61-77.
32. Isaksson S, Skoog Svanberg A, Sydsjö G, Thurin-Kjellberg A, Karlström PO, Solensten N-G, Lampic C. Two decades after legislation on identifiable donors in Sweden: are recipient couples ready to be open about using gamete donation? Hum Reprod 2011;26:853-860.
33. Isaksson S, Sydsjö G, Skoog Svanberg A, Lampic C. Disclosure behaviour and intentions among 111 couples following treatment with oocytes or sperm from identity-release donors: follow-up at offspring age 1-4 years. Hum Reprod 2012;27:2998-3007.
34. JonesHWJr, Cooke I, Kempers R, Brinsden P, Saunders D. International Federation of Fertility Societies surveillance 2010: preface. Fertil Steril 2011;95:491.
35. Klock SC, Greenfeld DA. Parents' knowledge about the donors and their attitudes toward disclosure in oocyte donation. Hum Reprod 2004;19:1575-1579.
36. Klock SC, Maier D. Psychological factors related to donor insemination. Fertil Steril 1991;56:489-495.
37. Lalos A, Gottlieb C, Lalos O. Legislated right for donor-insemination children to know their genetic origin: a study of parental thinking. Hum Reprod 2007;22:1759-1768.
38. Lampic C, Skoog Svanberg A. Attitudes towards gamete donation among IVF doctors in the Nordic countries-are they in line with national legislation? J Assist Reprod Genet 2009;26:231-238.
39. 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.
40. Lindblad F, Gottlieb C, Lalos O. To tell or not to tell-what parents think about telling their children that they were born following donor insemination. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol 2000;21:193-203.
41. Lycett E, Daniels K,Curson R,Golombok S. School-aged children of donor insemination: a study of parent's disclosure patterns. Human Reprod 2005;20:810-819.
42. Mac Dougall K, Becker G, Scheib JE, Nachtigall RD. Strategies for disclosure: how parents approach telling their children that they were conceived with donor gametes. Fertil Steril 2007;87:524-533.
43. MacCallum F. Embryo donation parents' attitudes towards donors: comparison with adoption. Hum Reprod 2009;24:517-523.
44. MacCallum F, Golombok S. Embryo donation families: mothers' decisions regarding disclosure of donor conception. Hum Reprod 2007;22:2888-2895.
45. MacCallum F, Golombok S, Brinsden P. Parenting and child development in families with a child conceived through embryo donation. J Fam Psychol 2007;21:278-287.
46. Murray C, Golombok S. To tell or not to tell: the decision-making process of egg-donation parents. Hum Fertil 2003;6:89-95.
47. MurrayC, MacCallum F, Golombok S. Egg donation parents and their children at age 12 years. Fertil Steril 2006;85:610-618.
48. Nachtigall R, Becker G,Wozny M. The effects of gender-specific diagnosis on men's and women's response to infertility. Fertil Steril 1992;57:113-121.
49. Nachtigall R, Tschan J, Szkupinski S, Pitcher L, Becker G. Stigma, disclosure, and family functioning among parents of children conceived through donor insemination. Fertil Steril 1997;68:83-89.
50. Nachtigall RD, Becker G, Quiroga SS, Tschann JM. The disclosure decision: concerns and issues of parents of children conceived through donor insemination. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998;178:1165-1168.
51. Peterson BD, Newton CR, Rosen KH, Skaggs GE. Gender differences in how men and women who are referred for IVF cope with infertility stress. Hum Reprod 2006; 21:2443-2449.
52. Petronio S. Boundaries of privacy: Dialectics of disclosure. Albany, NY, USA: SUNY Press, 2002.
53. Readings J, Blake L, Casey P, Jadva V, Golombok S. Secrecy, disclosure and everything in-between: Decisions of parents of children conceived by donor insemination, egg donation and surrogacy. Reprod Biomed Online 2011;22:485-495.
54. Rosholm R, Lund R, Molbo D, Schmidt L. Disclosure patterns of mode of conception among mothers and fathers-5-year follow-up of the Copenhagen Multi-centre Psychosocial Infertility (COMPI) cohort. Hum Reprod 2010;25:2006-2017.
55. Salter-Ling N, Hunter M, Glover L. Donor insemination: exploring the experience of treatment and intention to tell. J Reprod Infant Psychol 2001;19:175-186.
56. Shehab D,Duff J, Pasch LA,MacDougall K, Scheib JE,NachtigallRD.Howparentswhose children have been conceived with donor gametes make their disclosure decision: contexts, influences, and couple dynamics. Fertil Steril 2008;89:179-187.
57. Skoog Svanberg A, Lampic C, Bergh T, Lundkvistö . Public opinion regarding oocyte donation in Sweden. Hum Reprod 2003;18:1107-1114.
58. Skoog Svanberg A, Sydsjö G, Ekholm Selling K, Lampic C. Attitudes towards gamete donation among Swedish gynaecologists and obstetricians. Hum Reprod 2008; 23:904-911.
59. Söderström-Anttila V, Sajaniemi N, Tiitinen A, Outi H. Health and development of children born after oocyte donation comaperd with that of those born after in-vitro fertilization, and parents' attitudes regarding secrecy.HumReprod 1998;7:2009-2015.
60. Sö derström-Anttila V, Foudila T, Ripatti UR, Siegberg R. Embryo donation: outcome and attitudes among embryo donors and recipients. Hum Reprod 2001; 16:1120-1128.
61. Sö derström-Anttila V, Sälevaara M, Suikkari AM. Disclosure decisions in families with oocyte donation children born during a 15-year period. Hum Reprod 2010; 25:2535-2542.
62. Steuber KR, Solomon DH. 'So, when are you two having a baby?' Managing information with social network members during infertility. In: Miller-Day M (eds). Family Communication, Connections, and Health Transitions. New York. USA: Peter Lang Publishing, 2010, 297-322.
63. Steuber KR, Solomon DH. Factors that predict married partners' disclosure about infertility to social network members. J Appl Commun Res 2011;39:250-270.
64. Steuber KR, Solomon DH. Relational uncertainty, partner interference, and privacy boundary turbulence: Explaining discrepancies in spouses' infertility disclosures. J Soc Pers Relat 2012;29:3-27.
65. Stuart-Smith SJ, Smith JA, Scott EJ. To know or not to know? Dilemmas for women receiving unknown oocyte donation. Hum Reprod 2012;27: 2067-2075.
66. Thorn P, Daniels K. Arguments for and against information sharing in families created with the help of DI-recent developments and the results of an exploratory study. Geburtsh Frauenheilk 2007;67:993-1001.
67. van Berkel D, van der Veen L, Kimmel I, te Velde E. Differences in the attitudes of couples whose children were conceived through artificial insemination by donor in 1980 and in 1996. Fertil Steril 1999;71:226-231.
68. van Berkel D, Candido A, Pijffers WH. Becoming a mother by non-anonymous egg donation: secrecy and the relationship between egg recipient, egg donor and egg donation child. J Psychosom Obstet Gynecol 2007;28:97-104.
69. Vangelisti AL, Caughlin JP. Revealing family secrets: The influence of topic, function, and relationship. J Soc Pers Relat 1997;14:679-705.
70. Yee S, Blyth E, Ka Tat Tsang A. Views of donors and recipients regarding disclosure to children following altruistic known oocyte donation. Reprod Biomed Online 2011; 23:851-859.
71. Zegers-Hochschild F, Adamson GD, de Mouzon J, Ishihara O, Mansour R, Nygren K, Sullivan E, Vanderpoel S. International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology (ICMART) and the World Health Organization (WHO) revised glossary of ART terminology. Fertil Steril 2009;92:1520-1524.