Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

German guidelines for psychosocial counselling in the area of “cross border reproductive services”

  • Reproductive Medicine
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

An increasing number of couples and individuals with a desire for a child travel abroad for assisted reproductive technologies that are not available in their home country. This trend has been coined “cross border reproductive services” (CBRS), often comprising third party reproduction. In order to respect the welfare of all parties involved, the German Society for Fertility Counselling has developed guidelines for psychosocial counselling in this area in 2010. The following article raises some of the controversies in CBRS and introduces these guidelines.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. According to a proposal by Blyth, Thorn and Wischmann (2011), [see references 2, 5–7] the more neutral term “cross border reproductive services” is used in this paper instead of the potentially inappropriate term “cross border reproductive care” as “care” implies a benevolent notion that may not always be present.

  2. In Germany, according to changes in the Embryo Protection Act in June 2011, PGD has become possible if the pregnancy results in a stillbirth or the child to be conceived suffers from a severe genetic disease.

  3. Although there are several websites providing information of legislations in various countries (see 1.8 below), information such as the right of offspring to access donor information or the legal status of a surrogate are not always available nor is the information online always up-to-date or include typical clinical practice for those areas where there is no legislation (yet).

  4. The Social Code, Section V determines which cases are excluded from reimbursement.

  5. In many jurisdictions, the woman giving birth is the legal mother, her husband the legal father.

References

  1. Pennings G, de Wert G, Shenfield F, Cohen J, Tarlatzis B, Devroey P (2008) ESHRE task force on ethics and law 15: cross-border reproductive care. Hum Reprod 23(10):2182–2184. doi:10.1093/humrep/den184

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. McKelvey A, David A, Shenfield F, Jauniaux E (2009) The impact of cross-border reproductive care or “fertility tourism” on NHS maternity services. BJOG 116(11):1520–1523

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Kraske M, Ludwig U (2005) Die Babygrenze. Der Spiegel 46:108–118

    Google Scholar 

  4. Schindele E (2006) Der Eierdeal—das globale Geschäft mit menschlichen Eizellen. Deutschlandfunk. http://www.dradio.de/dlf/sendungen/wib/545060/. Accessed 12 Feb 2009

  5. Thorn P, Wischmann T, Blyth E (2012) Cross border reproductive services—suggestions for an ethically based minimum standard of care in Europe. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol 33:1–6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Whittaker A (2011) Cross-border assisted reproduction care in Asia: implications for access, equity and regulations. Reprod Health Matters 19(37):107–116. doi:10.1016/S0968-8080(11)37575-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Pfeffer N (2011) Eggs-ploiting women: a critical feminist analysis of the different principles in transplant and fertility tourism. Reprod Biomed Online 23:634–641. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2011.08.005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Shenfield F, Pennings G, De Mouzon J et al (2011) ESHRE’s good practice guide for cross-border reproductive care for centers and practitioners. Hum Reprod 26:1625–1627

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. College of Physicians (2001) Reproductive medicine and Belgian register for assisted procreation. Verslag 1998–1999

  10. Vandervorst M, Staessen C, Sermon K et al (2000) The Brussel’s experience of more than 5 years of clinical preimplanation genetic diagnosis. Hum Reprod Update 6:364–373. doi:10.1093/humupd/6.4.364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Velasco JG (2007) Egg donation in Spain. The Spanish point of view. Focus on Reproduction 26–30

  12. Shenfield F, de Mouzon J, Pennings G, Ferraretti AP, Nyboe Andersen A, de Wert G, Goossens V (2010) Cross border reproductive care in six European countries. Hum Reprod 25:1361–1368. doi:10.1093/humrep/deq057

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Culley L, Hudson N, Blyth E, Norton W, Pacey A, Rapport F (2011) Transnational reproduction: an exploratory study of UK residents who travel abroad for fertility treatment. Summary Report. http://www.transrep.co.uk/index.php?p=4. Accessed 09 Jan 2012

  14. Hudson N, Culley L (2011) Assisted reproductive travel: UK patient trajectories. Reprod Biomed Online 23:573–581. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2011.07.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. International Consumer Support for Infertility (iCSi) (2008) Travelling abroad for assisted reproductive (ART) treatment. International consumer support for infertility. http://www.icsicommunity.org/information/fact-sheets/travelling-abroad-for-art. Accessed 21 July 2010

  16. Kleinschmidt D, Thorn P, Wischmann T (2008) Kinderwunsch und professionelle Beratung. Das Handbuch des Beratungsnetzwerkes Kinderwunsch Deutschland (BKiD). Kohlhammer, Stuttgart

  17. Thorn P, Wischmann T (2009) German guidelines for psychosocial counselling in the area of gamete donation. Hum Fertil (Camb) 12(2):73–80. doi:10.1080/14647270802712728

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Thorn P (2008) Reproduktives Reisen—eine Expertise für den Pro Familia Bundesverband. Pro Familia Bundesverband. http://www.profamilia.de/shop/download/285.pdf. Accessed 24 Sep 2009

  19. Pennings G (2004) Legal harmonization and reproductive tourism in Europe. Hum Reprod 19(12):2689–2694. doi:10.1093/humrep/deh486

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Karlstrom PO, Bergh C (2007) Reducing the number of embryos transferred in Sweden-impact on delivery and multiple birth rates. Hum Reprod 22(8):2202–2207. doi:10.1093/humrep/dem120

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Ombelet W, De Sutter P, Van der Elst J, Martens G (2005) Multiple gestation and infertility treatment: registration, reflection and reaction—the Belgian project. Hum Reprod Update 11(1):3–14. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmh048

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Blake D, Proctor M, Johnson N, Olive D (2005) Cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted conception. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (4):CD002118. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD002118.pub2

  23. Günther H-L, Taupitz J, Kaiser P (2008) Embryonenschutzgesetz: Juristischer Kommentar mit medizinisch-naturwissenschaftlichen Einführungen. Kohlhammer, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  24. Blyth E, Thorn P, Wischmannn T (2011) CBRC and psychosocial counselling: assessing needs and developing an ethical framework for practice. Reprod Biomed Online 23(5):642–651. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2011.07.009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. European Parliament and the Council of the European Union (2004) Directive 2004/23/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=de&type_doc=Directive&an_doc=2004&nu_doc=23. Accessed 25 March 2011

  26. Blyth E (2012) Guidelines for infertility counselling in different countries: is there an emerging trend? Hum Reprod 27:2046–2057. doi:10.1093/humrep/des112

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Praxis für Paar-und Familientherapie, Langener Str. 37, 64546, Mörfelden, Germany

    Petra Thorn

  2. Institut für Medizinische Psychologie, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Bergheimer Str. 20, 69115, Heidelberg, Germany

    Tewes Wischmann

Authors
  1. Petra Thorn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tewes Wischmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Petra Thorn.

Additional information

Preliminary note

The following article is based on the “Guidelines for psychosocial counselling in the area of cross border reproductive services” published by the German Society for Fertility Counselling in Germany in 2010 (We would like thank the Journal für Reproduktionsmedizin und Endokrinologie where this article appeared originally for the rights to summarize and re-publish it in English); it has been updated as this subject has received increasing attention. Although it refers to the legal situation in Germany, many issues raise similar debates in other countries. It describes diagnostic and therapeutic interventions of Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART) which are prohibited in Germany. Describing these interventions does not imply that the authors support the legalization of these procedures or encourage travelling abroad (The term “abroad” is used for any country that is not the country of residence of the intended parents) for ART. Furthermore, the ethical significance and implications of these procedures are specifically not addressed in this article.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Thorn, P., Wischmann, T. German guidelines for psychosocial counselling in the area of “cross border reproductive services”. Arch Gynecol Obstet 287, 599–606 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-012-2599-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-012-2599-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation