Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T20:02:26.999Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 10 - Counseling Nonidentified Gamete Donors

from III - Third Party Reproduction: Assessment and Preparation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 November 2022

By
Uschi Van den Broeck  and
Laura Josephs
Edited by
Sharon N. Covington
Sharon N. Covington
Affiliation:
Shady Grove Fertility, Rockville, MD
Get access

Summary

The egg donor or sperm donor plays a very important role in the reproductive medicine practice. The donor is both a patient and not a patient. He or she is a patient in that he/she must be taken care of both physically and psychologically. He or she is not a patient, in that the donor is not presenting for his/her own treatment. When the gamete donor enters the consultation room, the fertility counselor will be challenged in his/her many different roles and responsibilities which we will identify and discuss in the chapter. In addition, we will highlight key issues in how to prepare for and conduct the clinical interview, the usefulness of, and decision making, regarding psychological testing, how to ensure informed consent can be given, discuss the short- and long-term implications of gamete donation and zoom in on the experience of the gamete donor.

Keywords

psychological counselingpsychological assessmentmental health professionalrolesthird-party reproductiondonor motivationdonor screeningdonor experiencede-identified gamete donorunknown gamete donorfertility counseling
Type
Chapter
Information
Fertility Counseling: Clinical Guide , pp. 106 - 114
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Applegarth, LD, Kingsberg, SA. The donor as patient: assessment and support. In: Covington, SN, Burns, LH, Eds. Infertility Counseling: A Handbook for Clinicians, 2nd ed. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2006, 339–355.Google Scholar
International Federation of Fertility Societies’ Surveillance (IFFS) 2019: Global Trends in Reproductive Policy and Practice, 8th ed. Global Reprod Health 2019;4(1):29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braverman, AM. Mental health counseling in third-party reproduction in the United States: evaluation, psychoeducation, or ethical gatekeeping? Fertil Steril 2015;104(3):501–506.Google Scholar
Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine and the Practice Committee of the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology: Guidance regarding gamete and embryo donation. Fertil Steril 2021;115(6):1395–1410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ESHRE: Task Force on Ethics and Law. Gamete and embryo donation. Hum Reprod 2002;17:1407–1408.Google Scholar
Guidelines for counseling in infertility [Online]. Available from: www.eshre.euGoogle Scholar
Pasch, LA. New realities for the practice of egg donation: a family-building perspective. Fertil Steril 2018;110(7):1194–1202.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Skillern, A, Cedars, M, Huddleston, H. Egg donor informed consent tool (EDICT): development and validation of a new informed consent tool for oocyte donors. Fertil Steril 2013;99:1733–1738.Google Scholar
Samplaski, M, Klipstein, S. There is no such thing as anonymity: loss of donor sperm anonymity in the era of direct to consumer (DTC) genetic testing. Fertility and Sterility, Editorial Office, American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Available from: www.fertstertdialog.com/posts/there-is-no-such-thing-as-anonymity-loss-of-donor-sperm-anonymity-in-the-era-of-direct-to-consumer-dtc-genetic-testing [last accessed June 16, 2022].Google Scholar
Harper, JC, Kennett, D, Reisel, D. The end of donor anonymity: how genetic testing is likely to drive anonymous gamete donation out of business. Hum Reprod 2016;31(6):1135–1140.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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(1):1–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Purewal, S, van den Akker OBA. Systematic review of oocyte donation: investigating attitudes, motivations and experiences. Hum Reprod Update 2009;15:499–515.Google Scholar
Jadva, V, Freeman, T, Kramer, W, Golombok, S. Sperm and oocyte donors’ experiences of anonymous donation and subsequent contact with donor offspring. Hum Reprod 2011;26:638–646.Google Scholar
Provoost, V, Van Rompuy, F, Pennings, G. Non-donors’ attitudes towards sperm donation and their willingness to donate. J Assist Reprod Genet 2018;35(1):107–118.Google Scholar
Lampic, C, Skoog Svanberg, A, Sydsjö, G. Attitudes towards disclosure and relationship to donor offspring among a national cohort of identity-release oocyte and sperm donors. Hum Reprod 2014;29(9):1978–1986.Google Scholar
Bracewell-Milnes, T, Saso, S, Bora, S, et al. Investigating psychosocial attitudes, motivations and experiences of oocyte donors, recipients and egg sharers: a systematic review. Hum Reprod Update 2016;22(4):450–465.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kirkman, M, Bourne, K, Fisher, J, Johnson, L, Hammarberg, K. Gamete donors’ expectations and experiences of contact with their donor offspring. Hum Reprod 2014;29(4):731–738.Google Scholar
Hammarburg, K, Carmichael, M, Tinney, L, Mulder, A. Gamete donors’ and recipients’ evaluation of donor counseling: a prospective longitudinal cohort study. Aust N Z J Gynaecol 2008;48:601–606.Google Scholar
Miettinen, A, Rotkirch, A, Suikkari, AM, Söderström-Anttila, V. Attitudes of anonymous and identity-release oocyte donors towards future contact with donor offspring. Hum Reprod 2019;34(4):672–678.Google Scholar
Daniels, K, Lalos, O. The Swedish Insemination Act and the availability of donors. Hum Reprod 1995;7:1871–1874.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×