Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 2/2020

Open Access 01-02-2020 | Assisted Reproduction Technologies

Worlds apart or two sides of the same coin? Attitudes, meanings, and motives of potential oocyte and sperm donors in Austria

Authors: M. Flatscher-Thöni, B. Böttcher, W. Geser, A. Lampe, G. Werner-Felmayer, C. Voithofer, C. Schusterschitz

Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics | Issue 2/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Gamete donors and recipients of such donations have been explored by previous studies, which mostly focus on post-donation scenarios. Our study analyses the general willingness to donate oocytes or sperm and focuses on differences between potential female and male donors in attitudes, meanings, and motives in a pre-donation setting.

Methods

An electronic survey (n = 555 students) was used in this anonymous observational study. To enable comparisons between men and women regarding their attitudes, meanings, and motives and their willingness to donate gametes, we designed two separate questionnaires.

Results

The sample was divided into three groups based on the willingness to donate: potential donors (n = 133; women: 48.1%, men: 51.9%); doubtful donors (n = 207; women: 75.8%, men: 24.2%); and non-donors (n = 215; women: 68.3%, men: 31.7%). The group of potential male donors (39.2%) was significantly larger than the group of potential female donors (16.9%). Significant differences regarding altruism, the meaning of one’s self-worth, and passing on the own genes were found between doubtful and potential donors. Potential donors attached less value to altruism but more value to the enhancement of one’s self-worth and passing on one’s genes than doubtful donors. The motive of passing on one’s genes and altruistic motives were more important to men than to women.

Conclusion

This study helps to create a better understanding of potential donors in the existing donation framework and supports the evaluation of the given regimes in the context of designing an improved framework.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Pennings G, de Mouzon J, Shenfield F, Ferraretti AP, Mardesic T, Ruiz A, et al. Socio-demographic and fertility-related characteristics and motivations of oocyte donors in eleven European countries. Hum Reprod. 2014;29:1076–89.CrossRef Pennings G, de Mouzon J, Shenfield F, Ferraretti AP, Mardesic T, Ruiz A, et al. Socio-demographic and fertility-related characteristics and motivations of oocyte donors in eleven European countries. Hum Reprod. 2014;29:1076–89.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Flatscher-Thöni M, Voithofer C. Should reproductive medicine be harmonized within Europe? Eur J Health Law. 2015;22:61–74.CrossRef Flatscher-Thöni M, Voithofer C. Should reproductive medicine be harmonized within Europe? Eur J Health Law. 2015;22:61–74.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Purewal S, van den Akker OBA. Systematic review of oocyte donation: investigating attitudes, motivations and experiences. Hum Reprod Update. 2009;15:499–515.CrossRef Purewal S, van den Akker OBA. Systematic review of oocyte donation: investigating attitudes, motivations and experiences. Hum Reprod Update. 2009;15:499–515.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Klock SC, Stout JE, Davidson M. Psychological characteristics and factors related to willingness to donate again among anonymous oocyte donors. Fertil Steril. 2003;79:1312–6.CrossRef Klock SC, Stout JE, Davidson M. Psychological characteristics and factors related to willingness to donate again among anonymous oocyte donors. Fertil Steril. 2003;79:1312–6.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Hershberger P. Recipients of oocyte donation: an integrative review. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2004;33:610–21.CrossRef Hershberger P. Recipients of oocyte donation: an integrative review. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2004;33:610–21.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Purewal S, van den Akker O. I feel like they were mine and I should be looking after them‘: an exploration of non-patient women’s attitudes towards oocyte donation. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 3rd ed. 2009;30:215–22.CrossRef Purewal S, van den Akker O. I feel like they were mine and I should be looking after them‘: an exploration of non-patient women’s attitudes towards oocyte donation. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 3rd ed. 2009;30:215–22.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Sydsjö G, Lampic C, Brändström S, Gudmundsson J, Karlström P-O, Solensten NG, et al. Who becomes a sperm donor: personality characteristics in a national sample of identifiable donors. BJOG: Int J Obstet Gynaecol. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd (10.1111). 2012;119:33–9.CrossRef Sydsjö G, Lampic C, Brändström S, Gudmundsson J, Karlström P-O, Solensten NG, et al. Who becomes a sperm donor: personality characteristics in a national sample of identifiable donors. BJOG: Int J Obstet Gynaecol. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd (10.1111). 2012;119:33–9.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Van den Broeck U, Vandermeeren M, Vanderschueren D, Enzlin P, Demyttenaere K, D'Hooghe T. A systematic review of sperm donors: demographic characteristics, attitudes, motives and experiences of the process of sperm donation. Hum Reprod Update. 2013;19:37–51.CrossRef Van den Broeck U, Vandermeeren M, Vanderschueren D, Enzlin P, Demyttenaere K, D'Hooghe T. A systematic review of sperm donors: demographic characteristics, attitudes, motives and experiences of the process of sperm donation. Hum Reprod Update. 2013;19:37–51.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Bracewell-Milnes T, Saso S, Bora S, Ismail AM, Al-Memar M, Hamed AH, et al. Investigating psychosocial attitudes, motivations and experiences of oocyte donors, recipients and egg sharers: a systematic review. Hum Reprod Update. 2016;22:450–65.CrossRef Bracewell-Milnes T, Saso S, Bora S, Ismail AM, Al-Memar M, Hamed AH, et al. Investigating psychosocial attitudes, motivations and experiences of oocyte donors, recipients and egg sharers: a systematic review. Hum Reprod Update. 2016;22:450–65.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Svanberg AS, Lampic C, Bergh T, Lundkvist O. Characterization of potential oocyte donors in Sweden. Hum Reprod. 2003;18:2205–15.CrossRef Svanberg AS, Lampic C, Bergh T, Lundkvist O. Characterization of potential oocyte donors in Sweden. Hum Reprod. 2003;18:2205–15.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Svanberg AS, Lampic C, Bergh T, Lundkvist O. Public opinion regarding oocyte donation in Sweden. Hum Reprod. 2003;18:1107–14.CrossRef Svanberg AS, Lampic C, Bergh T, Lundkvist O. Public opinion regarding oocyte donation in Sweden. Hum Reprod. 2003;18:1107–14.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Nüssli AR, Sartorius G, Bienz I, Moffat R, de Geyter C. Rahmenbedingungen für die Bereitschaft junger Schweizer Frauen zur Spende von Eizellen. Schweizer Ärztezeitung. 2014;95:7. Nüssli AR, Sartorius G, Bienz I, Moffat R, de Geyter C. Rahmenbedingungen für die Bereitschaft junger Schweizer Frauen zur Spende von Eizellen. Schweizer Ärztezeitung. 2014;95:7.
13.
go back to reference Cook R, Golombok S. A survey of semen donation: phase II–the view of the donors. Hum Reprod. 1995;10:951–9.CrossRef Cook R, Golombok S. A survey of semen donation: phase II–the view of the donors. Hum Reprod. 1995;10:951–9.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Handelsman DJ, Dunn SM, Conway AJ, Boylan LM, Jansen RP. Psychological and attitudinal profiles in donors for artificial insemination. Fertil Steril. 1985;43:95–101.CrossRef Handelsman DJ, Dunn SM, Conway AJ, Boylan LM, Jansen RP. Psychological and attitudinal profiles in donors for artificial insemination. Fertil Steril. 1985;43:95–101.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Ekerhovd E, Faurskov A, Werner C. Swedish sperm donors are driven by altruism, but shortage of sperm donors leads to reproductive travelling. Ups J Med Sci Taylor & Francis. 2008;113:305–13.CrossRef Ekerhovd E, Faurskov A, Werner C. Swedish sperm donors are driven by altruism, but shortage of sperm donors leads to reproductive travelling. Ups J Med Sci Taylor & Francis. 2008;113:305–13.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Riggs DW, Russell L. Characteristics of men willing to act as sperm donors in the context of identity-release legislation. Hum Reprod. 2011;26:266–72.CrossRef Riggs DW, Russell L. Characteristics of men willing to act as sperm donors in the context of identity-release legislation. Hum Reprod. 2011;26:266–72.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Yee S, Hitkari JA, Greenblatt EM. A follow-up study of women who donated oocytes to known recipient couples for altruistic reasons. Hum Reprod. 2007;22:2040–50.CrossRef Yee S, Hitkari JA, Greenblatt EM. A follow-up study of women who donated oocytes to known recipient couples for altruistic reasons. Hum Reprod. 2007;22:2040–50.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Kalfoglou AL, Gittelsohn J. A qualitative follow-up study of women's experiences with oocyte donation. Hum Reprod. 2000;15:798–805.CrossRef Kalfoglou AL, Gittelsohn J. A qualitative follow-up study of women's experiences with oocyte donation. Hum Reprod. 2000;15:798–805.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Pierce J, Reitemeier PJ, Jameton A, Maclin VM, De Jonge CJ. Should gamete donation between family members be restricted? The case of a 16-year-old donor. Hum Reprod. 1995;10:1330–2 discussion1334–7.CrossRef Pierce J, Reitemeier PJ, Jameton A, Maclin VM, De Jonge CJ. Should gamete donation between family members be restricted? The case of a 16-year-old donor. Hum Reprod. 1995;10:1330–2 discussion1334–7.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Fielding D, Handley S, Duqueno L, Weaver S, Lui S. Motivation, attitudes and experience of donation: a follow-up of women donating eggs in assisted conception treatment. J Community Appl Soc Psychol. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 1998;8:273–87.CrossRef Fielding D, Handley S, Duqueno L, Weaver S, Lui S. Motivation, attitudes and experience of donation: a follow-up of women donating eggs in assisted conception treatment. J Community Appl Soc Psychol. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 1998;8:273–87.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Khamsi F, Endman MW, Lacanna IC, Wong J. Some psychological aspects of oocyte donation from known donors on altruistic basis. Fertil Steril. 1997;68:323–7.CrossRef Khamsi F, Endman MW, Lacanna IC, Wong J. Some psychological aspects of oocyte donation from known donors on altruistic basis. Fertil Steril. 1997;68:323–7.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Jadva V, Casey P, Readings J, Blake L, Golombok S. A longitudinal study of recipients' views and experiences of intra-family egg donation. Hum Reprod. 2011;26:2777–82.CrossRef Jadva V, Casey P, Readings J, Blake L, Golombok S. A longitudinal study of recipients' views and experiences of intra-family egg donation. Hum Reprod. 2011;26:2777–82.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Biller-Andorno N. Voluntariness in living-related organ donation. Transplantation. 2011;92:617–9.CrossRef Biller-Andorno N. Voluntariness in living-related organ donation. Transplantation. 2011;92:617–9.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Patel SR, Chadha P, Papalois V. Expanding the live kidney donor pool: ethical considerations regarding altruistic donors, paired and pooled programs. Exp Clin Transplant. 2011;9:181–6.PubMed Patel SR, Chadha P, Papalois V. Expanding the live kidney donor pool: ethical considerations regarding altruistic donors, paired and pooled programs. Exp Clin Transplant. 2011;9:181–6.PubMed
25.
go back to reference Lindheim SR, Chase J, Sauer MV. Assessing the influence of payment on motivations of women participating as oocyte donors. Gynecol Obstet Investig. 2001;52:89–92.CrossRef Lindheim SR, Chase J, Sauer MV. Assessing the influence of payment on motivations of women participating as oocyte donors. Gynecol Obstet Investig. 2001;52:89–92.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference German EK, Mukherjee T, Osborne D, Copperman AB. Does increasing ovum donor compensation lead to differences in donor characteristics? Fertil Steril. 2001;76:75–9.CrossRef German EK, Mukherjee T, Osborne D, Copperman AB. Does increasing ovum donor compensation lead to differences in donor characteristics? Fertil Steril. 2001;76:75–9.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Kenney NJ, McGowan ML. Looking back: egg donors' retrospective evaluations of their motivations, expectations, and experiences during their first donation cycle. Fertil Steril. 2010;93:455–66.CrossRef Kenney NJ, McGowan ML. Looking back: egg donors' retrospective evaluations of their motivations, expectations, and experiences during their first donation cycle. Fertil Steril. 2010;93:455–66.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Kalfoglou AL, Geller G. Navigating conflict of interest in oocyte donation: an analysis of donors' experiences. Womens Health Issues. 2000;10:226–39.CrossRef Kalfoglou AL, Geller G. Navigating conflict of interest in oocyte donation: an analysis of donors' experiences. Womens Health Issues. 2000;10:226–39.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Golombok S, Murray C, Jadva V, Lycett E, MacCallum F, Rust J. Non-genetic and non-gestational parenthood: consequences for parent-child relationships and the psychological well-being of mothers, fathers and children at age 3. Hum Reprod. 2006;21:1918–24.CrossRef Golombok S, Murray C, Jadva V, Lycett E, MacCallum F, Rust J. Non-genetic and non-gestational parenthood: consequences for parent-child relationships and the psychological well-being of mothers, fathers and children at age 3. Hum Reprod. 2006;21:1918–24.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Freeman T, Jadva V, Tranfield E, Golombok S. Online sperm donation: a survey of the demographic characteristics, motivations, preferences and experiences of sperm donors on a connection website. Hum Reprod. 2016;31:2082–9.CrossRef Freeman T, Jadva V, Tranfield E, Golombok S. Online sperm donation: a survey of the demographic characteristics, motivations, preferences and experiences of sperm donors on a connection website. Hum Reprod. 2016;31:2082–9.CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Skoog Svanberg A, Lampic C, Gejerwall A-L, Gudmundsson J, Karlström P-O, Solensten N-G, et al. Gamete donors' satisfaction; gender differences and similarities among oocyte and sperm donors in a national sample. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd (10.1111). 2013;92:1049–56.CrossRef Skoog Svanberg A, Lampic C, Gejerwall A-L, Gudmundsson J, Karlström P-O, Solensten N-G, et al. Gamete donors' satisfaction; gender differences and similarities among oocyte and sperm donors in a national sample. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd (10.1111). 2013;92:1049–56.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Worlds apart or two sides of the same coin? Attitudes, meanings, and motives of potential oocyte and sperm donors in Austria
Authors
M. Flatscher-Thöni
B. Böttcher
W. Geser
A. Lampe
G. Werner-Felmayer
C. Voithofer
C. Schusterschitz
Publication date
01-02-2020
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics / Issue 2/2020
Print ISSN: 1058-0468
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7330
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-019-01683-8

Other articles of this Issue 2/2020

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 2/2020 Go to the issue