Abstract
Purpose
This study attempted to obtain preliminary followup information regarding obstetrical outcomes and the psychosocial well-being of families created through ovum donation. There is presently very little known about this population with respect to obstetrical care, health status of offspring, family and marital relationships of recipient couples, or how couples feel about having chosen ovum donation as a family-building option.
Results
Fifty-nine couples were initially surveyed and, ultimately, extensive information was obtained for 30 husbands, 31 wives, and 51 offspring. There was a very high percentage of cesarean section deliveries (81.6%), and although a few children experienced health problems at birth, they are all now in good health and developmental milestones are within normal limits. Information was also obtained about breast-feeding experiences, choice of donor (known) [sister] or anonymous), reasons for choosing ovum donation over other parenting options, and the impact of this choice on marital and family relationships. Demographic data were also obtained.
Conclusions
For many infertile couples, the long struggle to become parents culminated in a successful birth, and the experience of pregnancy seemed to meet a need to be both biological and psychosocial parents. In general, subjects were extremely cooperative with the investigation and they indicated a desire to learn as much as possible about the psychosocial status of families created through ovum donation. As the assisted reproductive technologies move rapidly into the 21st century, it now seems imperative that health and mental health professionals gain more knowledge about the impact of third party reproduction and the psychosocial adjustment and well-being of families created by this medical technology.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology: Clinic specific outcome assessment, 1990–93. American Society for Reproductive Medicine, Birmingham, Alabama
Lessor R, Cervantes N, O'Connor N, Balmaceda J, Asch RN: An analysis of social and psychological characteristics of women volunteering to be ovum donors. Fertil Steril 1993;59:65
Schrover LR, Reis J, Collins RL, Blankenstein J, Kanoti G, Quigley MM: The psychological evaluation of oocyte donors. J. Psychosom Obstet Gynecol 1990;11:299–309
Schrover LR, Collins RL, Quigley MM, Blankenstein J, Kanoti G: Psychological follow-up of women evaluated as ovum donors. Hum Reprod 1991;6:1487
Klock S: Psychological evaluation and counseling of gamete recipients. Paper presented at the ASRM Postgraduate Course XIII on Clinical Assessment and Counseling in Third Party Reproduction. Montreal, Canada, 1993
Hanafin H: Psychological evaluation and counseling in surrogacy, gestational carrier and recipient couples. Paper presented at American Society of Reproductive Medicines Post-graduate Course XIII on Clinical Assessment and Counseling in Third Party Reproduction, Montreal, Canada, 1993
Kremer J, Frijling BW, Nass JLM: Psychosocial aspects of parenting by artificial insemination donor. Lancet 1984;1:628
Berger DM, Eisen A, Shuber J, Doody KF: Psychological patterns in donor insemination couples. Can J Psychiatry 1986;31:818
Purdie A, Peek JC, Adair V, Graham F, Fisher R: Attitudes of parents of young children to sperm donationimplications for donor recruitment. Hum Reprod 1994;9(7):1355
Golombek S, Cook R, Bish A, Murray C: Quality of parenting in families created by the new reproductive technologies: a brief report of preliminary findings. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol 1993;14:17
Kovacs GT, Mushin D, Kane H, Baker HW: A controlled study of the psycho-social development of children conceived following insemination with donor semen. Hum Reprod 1993;8(5):788
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Applegarth, L., Goldberg, N.C., Cholst, I. et al. Families created through ovum donation: A preliminary investigation of obstetrical outcome and psychosocial adjustment. J Assist Reprod Genet 12, 574–580 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02212577
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02212577