Do directed and non-directed oocyte donors differ regarding their motives, ambivalence, satisfaction and openness about donating?

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Emilia Thorup, Gunilla Sydsjö, Agneta Skoog Svanberg, Claudia Lampic
{"title":"Do directed and non-directed oocyte donors differ regarding their motives, ambivalence, satisfaction and openness about donating?","authors":"Emilia Thorup, Gunilla Sydsjö, Agneta Skoog Svanberg, Claudia Lampic","doi":"10.1016/j.rbmo.2024.104455","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Research question: </strong>Do directed oocyte donors differ from non-directed identity-release oocyte donors regarding pre-donation motives and ambivalence, and post-donation satisfaction and openness?</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>The study is part of the longitudinal Swedish Study on Gamete Donation where consecutive samples of identity-release gamete donors at seven Swedish University Hospitals were approached during a 3-year period (2005-2008). The participants of the current study were 16 women who donated oocytes to family members or friends (directed donation) and 123 women who donated to unknown recipients (non-directed donation). Survey data on motivation, ambivalence, post-donation satisfaction and openness were collected at five time points between acceptance as a donor and 14-17 years post-donation. Statistical group comparisons and longitudinal analyses were conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In contrast to non-directed donors, who reported general altruism as their main motivation, directed donors were primarily motivated by empathy with the recipients. Pre-donation ambivalence was present in a quarter of donors and did not differ between groups (P = 0.601). Post-donation satisfaction was similar between groups (P = 0.17) and stable over time (P = 0.37). One directed donor reported regretting her donation, and this was attributed to negative relations with the recipients. Donors from both groups were generally open about having donated, but some directed donors felt restricted by the recipients' wishes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite being differently motivated, the current findings suggest that directed oocyte donors are comparable to non-directed oocyte donors in terms of pre-donation ambivalence and post-donation satisfaction and openness. The findings also highlight how directed donation may be associated with specific challenges, which emphasizes the need for pre- and post-donation counselling.</p>","PeriodicalId":21134,"journal":{"name":"Reproductive biomedicine online","volume":"50 2","pages":"104455"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reproductive biomedicine online","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2024.104455","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Research question: Do directed oocyte donors differ from non-directed identity-release oocyte donors regarding pre-donation motives and ambivalence, and post-donation satisfaction and openness?

Design: The study is part of the longitudinal Swedish Study on Gamete Donation where consecutive samples of identity-release gamete donors at seven Swedish University Hospitals were approached during a 3-year period (2005-2008). The participants of the current study were 16 women who donated oocytes to family members or friends (directed donation) and 123 women who donated to unknown recipients (non-directed donation). Survey data on motivation, ambivalence, post-donation satisfaction and openness were collected at five time points between acceptance as a donor and 14-17 years post-donation. Statistical group comparisons and longitudinal analyses were conducted.

Results: In contrast to non-directed donors, who reported general altruism as their main motivation, directed donors were primarily motivated by empathy with the recipients. Pre-donation ambivalence was present in a quarter of donors and did not differ between groups (P = 0.601). Post-donation satisfaction was similar between groups (P = 0.17) and stable over time (P = 0.37). One directed donor reported regretting her donation, and this was attributed to negative relations with the recipients. Donors from both groups were generally open about having donated, but some directed donors felt restricted by the recipients' wishes.

Conclusions: Despite being differently motivated, the current findings suggest that directed oocyte donors are comparable to non-directed oocyte donors in terms of pre-donation ambivalence and post-donation satisfaction and openness. The findings also highlight how directed donation may be associated with specific challenges, which emphasizes the need for pre- and post-donation counselling.

定向和非定向卵细胞捐献者在捐献动机、矛盾心理、满意度和开放性方面是否存在差异?
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Reproductive biomedicine online
Reproductive biomedicine online 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
7.50%
发文量
391
审稿时长
50 days
期刊介绍: Reproductive BioMedicine Online covers the formation, growth and differentiation of the human embryo. It is intended to bring to public attention new research on biological and clinical research on human reproduction and the human embryo including relevant studies on animals. It is published by a group of scientists and clinicians working in these fields of study. Its audience comprises researchers, clinicians, practitioners, academics and patients. Context: The period of human embryonic growth covered is between the formation of the primordial germ cells in the fetus until mid-pregnancy. High quality research on lower animals is included if it helps to clarify the human situation. Studies progressing to birth and later are published if they have a direct bearing on events in the earlier stages of pregnancy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信