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.
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 .
To save content items 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.
Edited by
Fiona Kelly, La Trobe University, Victoria,Deborah Dempsey, Swinburne University of Technology, Victoria,Adrienne Byrt, Swinburne University of Technology, Victoria
While it is difficult to know exactly how often Australian women meet sperm donors online, the growth in online platforms for sperm donors and women to connect suggests the phenomenon is increasing. One reason cited for growth in the practice is that it gives donors the opportunity to develop a relationship with their donor offspring while the children are young. Drawing on qualitative interviews with sperm donors and media coverage of the phenomenon, this chapter considers the experience of donors who meet their recipient online and who have early contact with their offspring. It explores why donors choose to donate outside of the formal clinic environment, their expectations from early contact, and whether these expectations evolve over time. It concludes by considering the implications of increasing informal donation in a country where formal donation is legally regulated.
Edited by
Fiona Kelly, La Trobe University, Victoria,Deborah Dempsey, Swinburne University of Technology, Victoria,Adrienne Byrt, Swinburne University of Technology, Victoria
In recent decades, a number of jurisdictions have moved towards more open practices in donor conception, including legislating for the rights of donor-conceived people to trace their donor. In such contexts, the donor’s role is ambivalent. They are not expected to enact a parental role in relation to people conceived from their donation. However, they are expected to ‘be available’ for some form of relationship. Our UK-based research found that donors typically navigate these dual obligations by articulating a moral commitment to ‘following the lead’ of the families they help to create and particularly the people conceived from their donation. In this chapter, we illustrate how sperm and egg donors imagine and enact this commitment but also show that it is easier to say than to do. The embedded nature of donors’ personal lives and relationships create challenges in letting others decide their role in relation to recipient families.
The basic princples of cryobiology are described for both slow freezing and vitrification of spermatozoa. Specific aspects of cryopreserving human spermatozoa are discussed in detail, incluidng the formulation of cryopreservation media and their proper use. Alternative packaging devices are discussed in relation to the achievement of correct cooling and warming curves as well as effective biocontainment. High security straws are recommended as the best method to use from both perspectives, and a standard operating procedure (SOP) for easy use at the bench is provided. SOPs for human sperm vitrification techniques are also gven. Quality control and risk management aspects of sperm freezing and for cryobank organzation are described. Finally, there is a section on sperm donation.
Age-related changes in sperm output develop gradually without any evidence of sudden onset. Female fecundity starts to decline after 30 years of age and is greatly reduced after age 40 years. The effect of male age on fecundity remains controversial and few studies show a similar trend in men. The effect of ageing of the male partner on the risk for miscarriage has been studied extensively, although many studies are retrospective, span long observational periods and fail to control properly for maternal age effects, or have small sample sizes. The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) recommends the British Andrology Society guideline of limiting the age of sperm donors to 40 years. Paternal ageing does not affect the risk of miscarriage, and increased paternal age on its own is not an indication for prenatal diagnosis since the absolute risk for genetic anomalies in offspring is low.
In the UK, strict adherence to guidelines laid down by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has made the recruitment of sperm donors an arduous task. In donor insemination, the protection of the recipient and potential offspring from sexually transmitted and other inheritable disorders is paramount. When compared with embryos, the cryopreservation of sperm is usually relatively crude. Density gradient centrifugation (DGC) is almost universally accepted as the superior sperm preparation method for assisted reproductive techniques, donor insemination being no exception. Donor insemination provides an excellent research model. Several authors have used the system to examine the influence of semen parameters and sperm function testing on success rates. Donor insemination also provides an excellent tool to examine other factors governing success, for example, timing of inseminations and subtle female factors as the male gametes are of reasonably standardized quality.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.