女性同性伴侣的母亲身份:从伴侣处获取卵细胞(ROPA 法):评论文章

Abraham Martínez Ruiz
{"title":"女性同性伴侣的母亲身份:从伴侣处获取卵细胞(ROPA 法):评论文章","authors":"Abraham Martínez Ruiz","doi":"10.58779/issn.2954-467x.tjor2023.v2.n3.46","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The evolving concept of \"family\" reflects contemporary social changes, influenced by historical and cultural shifts. This review explores unconventional family models, focusing on same-sex families, particularly female same-sex couples. As advancements in assisted reproductive techniques (ART) empower these couples, the Reception of Oocytes from Partner (ROPA) method gains popularity. ROPA involves active participation of both partners in conception, with one as the oocyte provider and the other as the gestational mother. This review delves into clinical, ethical, and psychosocial aspects of ROPA, comparing it with other ART options like donor intrauterine insemination (DIUI) or in vitro fertilization (IVF). A comprehensive bibliographic search conducted in 2023 forms the basis of this exploration. Historical perspectives on ART's acceptance for same-sex couples, legislative changes, and global variations in donor anonymity are discussed. The ROPA method's procedural details, including donor selection and the roles of the genetic and gestational mothers, are outlined. The review also emphasizes the impact of donor anonymity laws on decision-making. Roles and responsibilities in the ROPA method are explored, with a focus on the reciprocal and reverse ROPA approaches. Medical indications, potential benefits, and the impact on obstetric risks are scrutinized. The review concludes with insights into motherhood in female same-sex couples, highlighting the prevalence of children raised in such families across diverse regions in the United States. This comprehensive examination aims to provide practitioners and patients with valuable insights into the clinical, ethical, and psychosocial dimensions of the ROPA method, fostering a better understanding of its advantages in comparison to other ART options.","PeriodicalId":494727,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Reproduction","volume":"26 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Motherhood in Female Same-Sex Couples: Reception of Oocytes from Partner (ROPA method): Review Article\",\"authors\":\"Abraham Martínez Ruiz\",\"doi\":\"10.58779/issn.2954-467x.tjor2023.v2.n3.46\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The evolving concept of \\\"family\\\" reflects contemporary social changes, influenced by historical and cultural shifts. This review explores unconventional family models, focusing on same-sex families, particularly female same-sex couples. As advancements in assisted reproductive techniques (ART) empower these couples, the Reception of Oocytes from Partner (ROPA) method gains popularity. ROPA involves active participation of both partners in conception, with one as the oocyte provider and the other as the gestational mother. This review delves into clinical, ethical, and psychosocial aspects of ROPA, comparing it with other ART options like donor intrauterine insemination (DIUI) or in vitro fertilization (IVF). A comprehensive bibliographic search conducted in 2023 forms the basis of this exploration. Historical perspectives on ART's acceptance for same-sex couples, legislative changes, and global variations in donor anonymity are discussed. The ROPA method's procedural details, including donor selection and the roles of the genetic and gestational mothers, are outlined. The review also emphasizes the impact of donor anonymity laws on decision-making. Roles and responsibilities in the ROPA method are explored, with a focus on the reciprocal and reverse ROPA approaches. Medical indications, potential benefits, and the impact on obstetric risks are scrutinized. The review concludes with insights into motherhood in female same-sex couples, highlighting the prevalence of children raised in such families across diverse regions in the United States. This comprehensive examination aims to provide practitioners and patients with valuable insights into the clinical, ethical, and psychosocial dimensions of the ROPA method, fostering a better understanding of its advantages in comparison to other ART options.\",\"PeriodicalId\":494727,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of Reproduction\",\"volume\":\"26 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of Reproduction\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"0\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.58779/issn.2954-467x.tjor2023.v2.n3.46\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Reproduction","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.58779/issn.2954-467x.tjor2023.v2.n3.46","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

家庭 "概念的演变反映了受历史和文化变迁影响的当代社会变迁。本综述探讨非传统家庭模式,重点关注同性家庭,尤其是女性同性伴侣。随着辅助生殖技术(ART)的进步,从伴侣处获取卵细胞(ROPA)的方法越来越受欢迎。ROPA 包括伴侣双方积极参与受孕,一方作为卵细胞提供者,另一方作为孕母。本综述深入探讨了 ROPA 的临床、伦理和社会心理方面,并将其与其他 ART 方法(如供体宫腔内人工授精(DIUI)或体外受精(IVF))进行了比较。2023 年进行的一次全面的文献检索构成了此次探讨的基础。文章从历史的角度探讨了同性伴侣对 ART 的接受程度、立法变化以及全球在捐献者匿名性方面的差异。概述了 ROPA 方法的程序细节,包括捐献者的选择以及遗传母亲和妊娠母亲的角色。审查还强调了捐献者匿名法对决策的影响。探讨了 ROPA 方法中的角色和责任,重点是对等和反向 ROPA 方法。对医学适应症、潜在益处以及对产科风险的影响进行了仔细研究。综述最后深入探讨了女性同性伴侣的母亲身份,强调了美国不同地区在此类家庭中抚养子女的普遍性。本综述旨在为从业人员和患者提供有关 ROPA 方法的临床、伦理和社会心理方面的宝贵见解,使他们更好地了解该方法与其他抗逆转录病毒疗法相比的优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Motherhood in Female Same-Sex Couples: Reception of Oocytes from Partner (ROPA method): Review Article
The evolving concept of "family" reflects contemporary social changes, influenced by historical and cultural shifts. This review explores unconventional family models, focusing on same-sex families, particularly female same-sex couples. As advancements in assisted reproductive techniques (ART) empower these couples, the Reception of Oocytes from Partner (ROPA) method gains popularity. ROPA involves active participation of both partners in conception, with one as the oocyte provider and the other as the gestational mother. This review delves into clinical, ethical, and psychosocial aspects of ROPA, comparing it with other ART options like donor intrauterine insemination (DIUI) or in vitro fertilization (IVF). A comprehensive bibliographic search conducted in 2023 forms the basis of this exploration. Historical perspectives on ART's acceptance for same-sex couples, legislative changes, and global variations in donor anonymity are discussed. The ROPA method's procedural details, including donor selection and the roles of the genetic and gestational mothers, are outlined. The review also emphasizes the impact of donor anonymity laws on decision-making. Roles and responsibilities in the ROPA method are explored, with a focus on the reciprocal and reverse ROPA approaches. Medical indications, potential benefits, and the impact on obstetric risks are scrutinized. The review concludes with insights into motherhood in female same-sex couples, highlighting the prevalence of children raised in such families across diverse regions in the United States. This comprehensive examination aims to provide practitioners and patients with valuable insights into the clinical, ethical, and psychosocial dimensions of the ROPA method, fostering a better understanding of its advantages in comparison to other ART options.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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