OBJECTIVE: To determine the views toward donor sperm and eggs of both men and women. The use of donor sperm or ova becomes an option for some infertile couples. DESIGN: Prospective cohort of infertile couples. SETTING: Eight California reproductive endocrinology practices. PATIENT(S): Infertile couples (n=377) were recruited after an initial infertility clinic visit. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): From questionnaires administered at recruitment, ratings concerning the impact of the use of donor gametes were assessed. Differences between men and women in attitudes toward donor gametes were compared with analysis of variance (ANOVA). Linear regression was used to identify independent predictors of attitudes toward gametes. RESULT(S): Women's attitudes toward donor sperm were significantly more negative than their attitudes toward donor eggs (5.1+/-1.4 vs. 4.7+/-1.6). Similarly, male donor gamete attitude scores were higher for donor sperm compared with donor eggs (4.9+/-1.6 vs. 4.1+/-1.6). Both men and women agreed that the use of donor sperm was more likely to have negative effects on their relationship and negative societal ramifications. Female donor gamete attitude scores were predicted by marital status, race, and education, whereas men's scores were independent of all measured factors. CONCLUSION(S): Both men and women view the use of donor sperm with more skepticism compared with the use of donor eggs, suggesting a unique underlying perception regarding the use of male donor gametes. Copyright (c) 2010 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the views toward donor sperm and eggs of both men and women. The use of donor sperm or ova becomes an option for some infertile couples. DESIGN: Prospective cohort of infertile couples. SETTING: Eight California reproductive endocrinology practices. PATIENT(S): Infertile couples (n=377) were recruited after an initial infertility clinic visit. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): From questionnaires administered at recruitment, ratings concerning the impact of the use of donor gametes were assessed. Differences between men and women in attitudes toward donor gametes were compared with analysis of variance (ANOVA). Linear regression was used to identify independent predictors of attitudes toward gametes. RESULT(S): Women's attitudes toward donor sperm were significantly more negative than their attitudes toward donor eggs (5.1+/-1.4 vs. 4.7+/-1.6). Similarly, male donor gamete attitude scores were higher for donor sperm compared with donor eggs (4.9+/-1.6 vs. 4.1+/-1.6). Both men and women agreed that the use of donor sperm was more likely to have negative effects on their relationship and negative societal ramifications. Female donor gamete attitude scores were predicted by marital status, race, and education, whereas men's scores were independent of all measured factors. CONCLUSION(S): Both men and women view the use of donor sperm with more skepticism compared with the use of donor eggs, suggesting a unique underlying perception regarding the use of male donor gametes. Copyright (c) 2010 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: J C Giltay; P M Kastrop; J H Tuerlings; J A Kremer; C H Tiemessen; K B Gerssen-Schoorl; F van der Veen; J de Vries; R Hordijk; G J Hamers; K Hansson; M van der Blij-Philipsen; L C Govaerts; M H Pieters; K Madan; J M Scheres Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 1999-02 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: A W Nap; R J Van Golde; J H Tuerlings; P De Sutter; M H Pieters; J C Giltay; P M Kastrop; D D Braat; J A Kremer Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 1999-08 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: Patricia Katz; Jonathan Showstack; James F Smith; Robert D Nachtigall; Susan G Millstein; Holly Wing; Michael L Eisenberg; Lauri A Pasch; Mary S Croughan; Nancy Adler Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2010-12-04 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: R Anguzu; R Cusatis; N Fergestrom; A Cooper; K D Schoyer; J B Davis; J Sandlow; K E Flynn Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2020-03-27 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: Bart C J M Fauser; Jacky Boivin; Pedro N Barri; Basil C Tarlatzis; Lone Schmidt; Rachel Levy-Toledano Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-01-25 Impact factor: 3.240