Non-donors’ attitudes towards sperm donation and their willingness to donate
- 276 Downloads
The aim of this article is to study attitudes about sperm donation and willingness to donate sperm in students who have never shown an interest in sperm donation.
The method used in this study is an electronic survey of 1012 male students.
Only one third of the respondents (34.3%) would consider donating sperm. Overall, 85.7% indicated a positive attitude towards sperm donation while 14.3% indicated a neutral or negative attitude. The highest scored barriers to donating were the lack of practical information and the fear that the partner would not agree. Almost 40% of the respondents feared that the donation might have a negative impact on their current or future relationship. The majority (83.6%) of those who considered donating thought donors should receive a financial compensation. Money was also one of the main motivators.
About 85% of the students thought positively about sperm donation but several factors such as perceived negative views by the social environment, especially the partner, may deter students from donating. This study indicates that the effect of strong incentives, for instance in monetary terms, on a donor pool consisting of students could be limited and that relational factors and donor’s perceptions of the views of the wider social network should be taken into account when recruiting donors.
KeywordsAttitude Donor conception Intention Sperm donation Students
The project was funded by the Research Fund of Ghent University, Belgium.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in the study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
- 6.Ide L, Verheecke T, Decleer W, Osmanagaoglu K. Opinieonderzoek bij potentiële spermadonoren naar het mogelijk toekomstig gedrag van dergelijke donoren indien de Belgische wetgeving de anonimiteit van de donor zou opheffen. Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2015;71:1229–31.Google Scholar
- 9.Heurckmans N, Pennings G, Sabbe K, Baetens P, Rigo A, Guldix E, et al. The attitude towards offspring by donor candidates and non-donors: the influence of payment, age, and fatherhood. Hum Reprod. 2001;16(suppl. 1):199.Google Scholar
- 11.Fishburn Hedges/ICM, Donation of Eggs and Sperm UK Survey. 2004. Unpublished results.Google Scholar
- 13.Royal Commission on New Reproductive Technologies Canada. Proceed with care: final report of the Royal Commission on New Reproductive Technologies. Ottawa: Canadian Government Publishing; 1993.Google Scholar
- 14.Eurobarometer Blood and cell and tissue donation. Special Eurobarometer 426/Wave EB82.2 – TNS Opinion & Social. Brussels: European Commission; 2015.Google Scholar