'I have to remind myself that everyone's search is different': experiences and outcomes of searching and not searching for donor connections among donor conceived adults.

STUDY QUESTION: What are the experiences and outcomes of donor conceived adults who are actively searching for, open to contact with, or not searching for donor connections? SUMMARY ANSWER: Most participants were actively searching or open to contact, and 67% had found or been found by a connection; finding or not finding experiences were complex. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: There is variation among donor conceived individuals in their interest in donor connections. Individual reasons for searching for connections, and which donor connections are searched for, also vary. Most research studies have focussed on individuals who are actively searching for their donor or donor siblings. Global increases in direct-to-consumer DNA testing and social media participation mean that connections may be made to individuals unaware of their (or their relatives') involvement with donor conception. These social and technological changes have also increased the chances of donor conceived individuals being contacted without expecting or desiring contact. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This study included 88 donor conceived adults, in the UK, who participated in an online multi-method survey between January and August 2022. The survey was designed in consultation with staff and volunteers from the UK's largest community networks for donor conception families (Donor Conception Network, DCN) and donor conceived people (Donor Conceived Register Registrants' Panel, DCRRP). It was piloted by five donor conceived people before its launch. Participants were recruited with assistance from DCN and DCRRP, via social media, university mailing lists, and snowballing. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Participants were mostly female (n = 65, 74%) and sperm donor conceived (n = 79, 90%). Of the 88 participants, 39 (44%) were actively searching for their donor connections, 44 (50%) were open to contact but not actively searching, and 5 (6%) were not searching. Questions were closed (yes/no, rating scale, or multiple choice) or open-ended, addressing experiences of donor conception, searching for connections, and finding or not finding connections. Data were analysed both quantitatively and qualitatively. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Quantitative results showed no differences between the groups on any demographic variables or in when or how they found out about being donor conceived, and no differences between active searchers and those open to contact in whether they had found their donor connections. Significant differences were found between groups in their interest in their genetic history and the perceived importance of genetics to their sense of identity, with active searchers being more interested and rating this as more important than those open to contact. Methods of searching significantly differed across groups, with active searchers using genetic testing and social media more than those open to contact. 59 participants across all groups (active searchers (n = 29, 74%), open to contact (n = 27, 61%), not open to contact (n = 3, 60%)) had found or been found by a donor connection. Experiences of finding or not finding donor connections among participants actively searching or open to contact were captured by the theme complexities, with six subthemes: uncertainties in searching and relating; searching as open-ended; different donor connections, different experiences; expectations and realities; searching and finding or not finding as catalysing change; and experiences of other donor conceived people. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Most participants were members of relevant community organizations. As is common in research in this area, the sample was mostly female and conceived using donor sperm. Donor conceived people who are disinterested in donor connections may be unlikely to participate in research on this topic. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The nature and impact of the search process itself should be considered when developing appropriate mechanisms of support for all donor conceived people, regardless of whether they are actively searching for connections or not. Further research should seek to better understand how donor conceived people with varying levels of interest in searching for donor connections differ from one another. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study was funded by the UK Economic and Social Research Council [New Investigator Award ES/S015426/1]. The authors have no competing interests to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Should a gamete bank verify the non-medical information provided by a donor?

Over the years, cases of fraud have been discovered where donors have been lying about their characteristics. The question raised by such cases is what the responsibility of the gamete bank is for the non-medical information provided by the donor. The problem is that extended donor profiles contain a large amount of information about different aspects of the donor's life and that not all this information can be verified or is worth verifying. Two cases are scrutinized in more detail: education and criminal record. The proposed solution is to split the donor information into a verified and a non-verified part with the non-verified part falling under the responsibility of the donor. The question of what information should be included in the verified part of the donor profile is still open.

Using the theory of planned behavior to predict parents' disclosure of donor conception to their children: a longitudinal study.

STUDY QUESTION: Can the application of the theory of planned behavior (TPB) help predict heterosexual parents' disclosure of donor conception to their children? SUMMARY ANSWER: Parents with a stronger will to act in accordance with social norms favoring disclosure were more likely to start the disclosure process within the next 5-9 years. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: In contrast to single mothers by choice and same-sex couples, heterosexual couples need to make an active decision to disclose their use of donor conception to their child. While disclosure at an early age is encouraged by international guidelines, many heterosexual-couple parents struggle with this. A previous study has found an association between parental scores of TPB factors and disclosure intention, but so far, no study has applied the TPB to predict parents' disclosure behavior. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: The present study is based on the fourth and fifth waves of data collection (T4 and T5) in a nation-wide longitudinal study. Participating parents had conceived through identity-release oocyte donation (n = 68, response rate 65%) and sperm donation (n = 62, response rate 56%) as part of a heterosexual couple. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: The present study is part of the prospective longitudinal Swedish Study on Gamete Donation (SSGD). Consecutive recruitment of couples starting oocyte or sperm donation treatment was conducted at all seven fertility clinics providing gamete donation in Sweden during a 3-year period (2005-2008). Participants were requested to complete postal surveys at five time points. The present study includes heterosexual-couple parents following oocyte or sperm donation who participated at the two latest time points when their children were 7-8 years old (T4), and 13-17 years old (T5). At T4, participants completed the study-specific TPB Disclosure Questionnaire (TPB-DQ) measuring attitudes and intentions to disclose the donor conception to the child, and disclosure behavior was assessed at both T4 and T5. Data from those participants who had not yet disclosed at T4 were analyzed using survival analysis with Cox regressions. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Forty participants had not disclosed the donor conception to their children at T4 and, out of these, 13 had still not disclosed at T5. We found a significant association between scores of the TPB factor Subjective norms at T4 and their subsequent disclosure behavior at T5 (HR = 2.019; 95% CI: 1.36-3.01). None of the other factors were significantly associated with disclosure behavior. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The present study concerns heterosexual-couple parents with children conceived following treatment with gametes from open-identity donors, which limits the generalizability of our findings to other groups and contexts. Other limitations include the risk of systematic attrition due to the longitudinal study design and decreased statistical power due to few participants. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Our findings highlight the importance of perceived subjective norms for parents' disclosure behavior and indicate that the co-parent's opinion about disclosure is of particular relevance in this regard. Counselors should focus on supporting prospective parents to initiate and maintain a healthy and open dialogue about concerns around building a family with donor conception. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The study was funded by the Swedish Research Council. The authors have no competing interests to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Sperm Donors' Identity Disclosure: Is It REALLY Crucial? For Whom?

OBJECTIVE: To study the preference of sperm donors with identity disclosure (ID) versus anonymous donors (AD) and to understand if this selection affects clinical outcomes in an Israeli population. METHODS: This retrospective study included patients who chose imported sperm donation during 2017-2021. Of these, 526 used their own (autologous) oocytes and 43 patients used donated oocytes (DO). The primary endpoint was the type of chosen donor with ID versus AD. We examined the tendency toward ID according to demographic parameters and the theoretical impact of donor-type selection on reproductive outcome and compared patients who performed cycles with autologous oocytes with those using DO. RESULTS: Single women had a significantly higher probability of choosing sperm donors with ID than heterosexual couples (55.6% vs. 33.3%, OR 2.5, CI 95% 1.52-4.11, P < 0.001). Although not significant, same-sex couples were more likely to choose sperm donors with ID than heterosexual couples (49.1% vs. 33.3%, OR 1.93, CI 95% 0.97-3.85, P = 0.06). Sperm donor samples, 2501 vials, were imported. It was performed 698 intra-uterine insemination and 812 in vitro fertilization cycles were performed, respectively, resulting in 283 pregnancies without differences between patients who chose sperm donors with ID versus AD sperm. No significant differences were observed regarding the option for sperm donors with ID between patients using DO (44.2%) and those using autologous oocytes (51.3%). CONCLUSION: While ID is important for a certain section (mainly single) of recipients, it is far from the only dominant factor during donor selection. Sperm donation type does not impact clinical outcomes.

Israeli students' perceptions regarding sperm donation: dilemmas reflections with dominant demographic effect.

BACKGROUND: Sperm donation has undergone significant medical and social transformations in recent decades. This study aimed to explore Israeli students' perceptions towards sperm donation and investigate the potential influence of demographic characteristics on these perceptions. DESIGN: The study encompassed 254 students from Tel-Aviv University, who completed an anonymous online survey in January-February 2021. This cross-sectional quantitative online survey, comprised 35 questions categorized into three sections: demographic data, assessment of prior knowledge, and perceptions of sperm donation (general perceptions related to both positive and negative stigmas associated with sperm donation, the roles and activities of sperm banks, and considerations surrounding identity disclosure versus the anonymity of sperm donors and their offspring). RESULTS: Participants exhibited a relatively low level of prior knowledge (mean 31.2 ± 19 of 100). Scores for positive and negative stigmas ranged from 1.3 to 2.2. Notably, the statement "Donors' anonymity preservation is crucial to maintain sperm donation" received a mean of 3.7. Seeking for anonymous sperm donation identity both by recipients and offspring was ranked with low means (1.5 and 1.7, respectively). However, the pursuit of half-siblings by mothers or siblings themselves received higher ratings ranging from 2.7 to 3. Women's stigma ranking were notably lower, while men emphasized the importance of donor anonymity. CONCLUSIONS: Sperm Banks hold a position of medical authority rather than being perceived as being commercial entity. The preservation of donor anonymity is widely accepted as a crucial element, prioritized over the requests for identity disclosure from recipients and offspring. Demographic parameters exhibit a strong and precise effects on participants' perceptions.

Predictors of gamete donation: a cross sectional survey study.

PURPOSE: In 2015, assisted reproductive technology (ART) accounted for 1.7% of all U.S. births, donor eggs accounted for over 17,000 started cycles in 2015, and donor sperm accounting for 6.2% of all cycles started in 2014. With increasing utilization of donor gametes as a method of assisting patients with infertility, the number of babies born each year utilizing gamete donation will also continue to increase. This study aimed to elucidate factors impacting decision to donate, amongst a representative national population. METHODS: A survey was distributed via the internet utilizing SurveyMonkey Enterprise with HIPAA compliance. Univariate regressions and frequencies were conducted between each demographic and personal characteristic and the willingness to donate. Log Binomial and linear regression was used categorical and continuous variables, and Risk ratios were calculated. RESULTS: In this large survey study, 64% of men and 50% of women reported they would be willing to donate gametes, with the majority desiring monetary compensation. Men with a high Consumer Financial Protection Bureau score were less likely to report that they would consider donating sperm compared to a medium high CFPB score. No other financial indicators were associated with considering donating sperm. There were no associations between CFPB score and egg donation outcomes. Black or African American women were less likely to consider donating their eggs compared to other groups, and more likely to desire > $5000 in compensation. CONCLUSIONS: In this large survey study, a small minority of participants reported they would be willing to donate to an unknown infertility patient for reproductive purposes. High and very high CFPB scores were associated with willingness to donate games, but not with desire for monetary compensation or amount.

Mapping Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications (ELSI) of gamete donation.

RESEARCH QUESTION: This scoping review investigates the Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications (ELSI) of gamete donation, a critical facet of Assisted Reproductive Technologies, by analyzing the evolving research scope, methodological approaches, and the geographical skew in the literature. Despite the increased global uptake of donor gametes, current scholarship predominantly emanates from Western contexts and focuses on majoritized groups. This bias constrains the universality of research findings and limits their applicability across varied legal, cultural, and social contexts, underscoring a need for broader inclusivity. DESIGN: We addressed 867 pivotal articles published between 1999 and 2019. RESULTS: Our analysis reveals a discernible escalation in research volume, with 62% based on empirical research. The intellectual landscape unfolds into four dominant clusters: Regulatory Frameworks, Incentives, and Access; Family Dynamics and Genetic Linkages; Identity and Privacy in Donor Conception; and Cultural and Societal Attitudes towards GD. Each cluster highlights nuanced dimensions of gamete donation, from regulatory intricacies and psychological welfare to identity ethics and cultural perceptions. CONCLUSION: Our findings advocate for a shift towards more globally representative and methodologically inclusive research. By integrating diverse cultural narratives and expanding geographical breadth, future research can offer holistic understandings of gamete donation, fostering equitable and culturally resonant practices and policies worldwide.

A Pilot Analysis of Whole Transcriptome of Human Cryopreserved Sperm.

Sperm cryopreservation is a procedure widely used to store gametes for later use, to preserve fertility in patients prior to gonadotoxic treatments or surgery, and for sperm donation programs. The purpose of the study was to assess the impact of cryopreservation on human sperm transcriptome. Semen samples were collected from 13 normospermic men. Each sample was divided into two aliquots. The total RNA was immediately extracted from one aliquot. The second aliquot was frozen and total RNA was extracted after a week of storage in liquid nitrogen. The RNA samples were randomized in four pools, each of six donors, and analyzed by microarrays. The paired Significance Analysis of Microarray was performed. We found 219 lower abundant transcripts and 28 higher abundant transcripts in cryopreserved sperm than fresh sperm. The gene ontology analysis disclosed that cryopreservation alters transcripts of pathways important for fertility (i.e., spermatogenesis, sperm motility, mitochondria function, fertilization, calcium homeostasis, cell differentiation, and early embryo development), although the increase of some transcripts involved in immune response can compensate for the harmful effects of freezing.

'I know it's not normal but it's normal to me, and that's all that matters': experiences of young adults conceived through egg donation, sperm donation, and surrogacy.

STUDY QUESTION: What are thoughts and feelings of young adults born following egg donation, sperm donation, and surrogacy? SUMMARY ANSWER: Young adults felt either unconcerned or positive about the method of their conception. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Much of what we know about adults born to heterosexual couples following anonymous donation has come from samples of donor conceived people who had found out about their origins during adulthood. There have been no studies of how young adults born through surrogacy feel about their conception and towards their surrogate. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Thirty-five young adults were interviewed as part of the seventh phase of a larger multi-method, multi-informant longitudinal study of assisted conception families in the UK. Adults were conceived using either egg donation, sperm donation, gestational surrogacy, or genetic surrogacy and were raised in households headed by heterosexual couples. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Participants had a mean age of 20 years and were born following traditional surrogacy (n = 10), gestational surrogacy (n = 5), egg donation (n = 11), or sperm donation (n = 9). All young adults born following sperm donation and most (n = 10) born from egg donation had an anonymous donor. In all surrogacy arrangements, the parents had met the surrogate prior to treatment. The majority of young adults were told about their conception by the age of 4 years. Participants were interviewed over the internet using a semi-structured interview. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using qualitative content analysis to understand young adults' thoughts and experiences related to their conception and whether they were interested in meeting their donor or surrogate. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Fourteen (40%) young adults felt their conception made them feel special or unique, with the remainder feeling either neutral or unconcerned (n = 21, 60%). A higher proportion of young adults conceived using egg donation (n = 8, 73%) felt unique/special compared to young adults born following sperm donation and surrogacy. For 10 of the young adults, their feelings about their conception had changed over time, with most becoming more positive (n = 9, 26%). For most young adults (n = 22, 63%), conception was rarely or infrequently discussed with others. However, when it was, these conversations were largely conducted with ease. Most (n = 25, 71%) did not know other individuals born through the same method of conception as themselves, and the vast majority (n = 34, 97%) were not members of any support groups. For the 25 young adults not in contact with their donor or surrogate, 11 wished to meet them, 8 did not want to have contact, and 6 were unsure. Young adults in contact with their donor or surrogate had varying levels of closeness to them. Only one young adult had searched for the identity of their donor. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Of the 47 young adults invited to participate in the present study, 35 agreed to take part resulting in a response rate of 74%. It is therefore not known how those who did not take part felt about their conception. Given that the families reported here had been taking part in this longitudinal study from when the target child was aged 1 year, they may have been more likely to discuss the child's conception than other families. The study also utilized self-report measures, which may have been prone to social desirability, with donor conceived young adults wanting to present their experiences in a positive light. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The findings suggest that young adults born through surrogacy and donor conception do not feel negatively about their birth and this may be a consequence of the young age at which they found out about their conception. Although some young adults said they wished to meet their donor, this did not necessarily mean they were actively searching for them. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The study was funded by the Wellcome Trust [grant number 208013/Z/17/Z]. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

'Doing' kinship: heterosexual parents' experiences of non-genetic parenthood through donor conception.

RESEARCH QUESTION: How do Dutch heterosexual parents who achieved parenthood through donor conception navigate non-genetic parenthood and kinship? DESIGN: A qualitative in-depth semi-structured interview study was performed between September 2018 and January 2019 with both partners of 13 Dutch heterosexual couples where the male partner suffered from infertility and who conceived a child with the help of a sperm donor. Interview questions were based on literature and clinical experiences of experts in the field of donor conception. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: All parents navigated non-genetic parenthood through 'doing' kinship: they negotiated the importance of nature versus nurture with regards to donor conception and non-genetic parenthood. Most parents perceived genetics as irrelevant for experiencing parenthood, bonding with their children and the preferred role of the donor in their future lives. Yet most of them found genetics relevant for generating similarities between the father and the child, and for wanting the same donor for all their children to ensure a full genetic relation among them. Additionally, based on the donor's genetic bond with the child, some men were anxious about the donor's role in the child's future life and the consequences for their position as a non-genetic father. A few women perceived genetics as relevant in terms of possible inherited illnesses from the donor. CONCLUSIONS: Parents experienced several ambiguities regarding the role of genetics in donor conception and navigated 'doing' kinship in various ways. These aspects need to be taken into consideration during the counselling of prospective parents planning to conceive with donor conception.

Asked to be a sperm donor: disclosure dilemmas of gay men living with HIV.

Previous research has documented the various challenges people living with HIV face as they navigate intimate relationships, including what is often referred to as disclosure. In studies of gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men, the issue of telling or not telling others about an HIV-positive status has been examined primarily in relation to communication with sexual partners, with few studies focusing on other aspects of intimacy. Drawing on interviews with gay men living with HIV, conducted in four clinics in London, this article explores the narratives of men who have been asked by female friends about the possibility of being a sperm donor. The narratives highlight layers of complexity which have received little attention, not only in research on HIV but also in studies of sperm donation and co-parenting. The article advances dialogue between these two largely separate bodies of work. Our data suggest that reluctance to share an HIV-positive status with others can be an important factor in deciding how to answer the 'sperm donor question'. Examining reproductive relationships of a specific kind - those based on friendships between women and gay men - the article develops the understanding of how secrecy about HIV shapes intimate lives.

Should patients pay for sperm given for free? Results from a pilot study on fertility clinics' views on the charging for altruistically donated sperm.

PURPOSE: Many countries prohibit payment for gamete donation, which means fertility clinics do not have to compensate donors. However, acquiring and utilizing donor sperm can still be expensive for fertility clinics. This study evaluates international fertility workers' views on charging patients for altruistically donated sperm. METHODS: Using social media and email, we disseminated a SurveyMonkey survey with a question that was specifically focused on opinions about charging patients for altruistically donated sperm. Clinicians were able to select multiple pre-populated answer choices as well as write answers that reflected their views as an open-ended response. Snowball sampling was utilized to reach international fertility clinicians. RESULTS: Of 112 respondents from 14 countries, 88% believe it is acceptable to charge for altruistically donated sperm based on one or more of four different assenting categories: so patients appreciate that sperm is valuable, because it generates funds for the running of the clinic, to cover specific costs associated with sperm, and to make a profit for the clinic. CONCLUSIONS: The consensus that charging for altruistically donated sperm is acceptable was not surprising since recruiting and processing donor sperm can be expensive for clinics. However, there were geographical differences for specific assenting answer choices which may be based on countries' income, and healthcare system, as well as religious and cultural beliefs.

University students' opinion on gamete donor identification regimes.

PURPOSE: This study aims to evaluate the opinion of university students about the identification or nonidentification of gamete donation and the probability of donation according to the different regimes. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional observational study based on an online anonymous survey including questions about sociodemographic data, reasons for considering donations, information about the donation process and legislation, and their opinions about the different regimes and how they would influence donations. RESULTS: In total, 1393 valid responses were obtained, with a mean age of 24.0 years (SD = 4.8), most of the respondents being female (68.5%), living in a relationship (56.7%), and without children (88.4%). The main reasons for considering donation would be altruism and monetary compensation. Overall, it was found that participants were poorly informed about the donation procedure and legislation. Students revealed preference for nonidentified donation, and they were less likely to donate in an open identity regime. CONCLUSION: Most university students consider themselves poorly informed about gamete donation, express a preference for nonidentified gamete donation, and would less likely donate on an open identity basis. Thus, an identified regime may be less attractive to potential donors and lead to a decrease in the availability of gamete donors.

[« I believe that children should know how they were conceived ¼]. / « J'ai la conviction que les enfants doivent connaître leur mode de conception ¼.

The decision to become a donor is an altruistic one. It allows infertile couples wishing to have a child to realize their dream. Although there have been developments in recent years concerning the lifting of donor anonymity, there is still progress to be made. Joseph Geantet is one of the people who have chosen to donate sperm. He shares his experience.

[Access to origins for persons conceived by donation in France]. / L'accès aux origines pour les personnes conçues par don en France.

It was a strong and long-standing demand of people born of gamete donation: to know who is the person who allowed them to come into the world. The French legislator seemed to take this need into account during the last revision of the bioethics law. But if the rules have already changed for donors, for whom anonymity becomes fixed-term, for individuals born from a donation, access to their origins is far from being guaranteed to this day.

Effects of virtual reality erotica on ejaculate quality of sperm donors: a balanced and randomized controlled cross-over within-subjects trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous research has shown that the type and duration of erotic material that men have access to during masturbation can influence semen parameters. To our knowledge, the use of virtual reality (VR) headsets to present erotica has not previously been studied. We reasoned that, because VR can provide a more immersive experience to the user, semen parameters of masturbatory ejaculates may be altered. METHODS: This study had a balanced and randomized controlled cross-over within-subjects design. 504 ejaculates were collected from 63 sperm donors at 4 locations in Denmark. During masturbation each donor was instructed to observe erotic material either on a touch screen monitor or using a VR headset. The order of each pair of within-subject treatments was randomized by the throw of a dice. Anonymized data were analysed with linear mixed and piecewise structural equation models. RESULTS: Both abstinence period and VR-use influenced the total number of motile spermatozoa ejaculated. For short abstinence periods, VR-use increased the number of motile sperm in the ejaculate. However, the difference between VR and non-VR ejaculates decreased as abstinence period increased such that there was no difference at the mean abstinence period of 58 h. For longer abstinence periods, total motile sperm counts were lower, on average, when men used VR compared to those that did not. CONCLUSION: The use of VR headsets to view erotica had a strong positive effect on the number of motile sperm in an ejaculate when the donor's abstinence time was short (< 24 h). VR-use could improve the ejaculate quality of men who are asked to provide samples after a short period of abstinence, such as men in infertile partnerships producing samples for ART or cancer patients depositing sperm before treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial retrospectively registered on 13 July 2022 at ClinicalTrials.gov. Identifier: NCT05457764.

Screening of chlamydia trachomatis in non-partner donors: situation of stored donations and proposal for periodic screening.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Lack of guidance on the frequency of Chlamydia trachomatis screening in non-partner donors has led to heterogeneous testing protocols. C. trachomatis was checked in sperm donations unscreened for C. trachomatis to determine the risk for C. trachomatis infection in recipients using historic sperm donations unscreened for C. trachomatis. A C. trachomatis screening protocol is proposed to harmonize C. trachomatis screening, for which a cost evaluation is provided. DESIGN: Retrospective study of sperm donations carried out between 2009 and 2019 from healthy non-partner donors for whom at least one straw was available. A straw was selected from the still available donations that had not been tested for C. trachomatis in urine at the time of donation. These sperm samples were screened for C. trachomatis by nucleic acid amplification (NAT). RESULTS: Forty donors were included in the analysis. The 210 analysed straws tested negative for C. trachomatis. A C. trachomatis screening protocol following the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) protocol for other sexually transmitted diseases (STD), i.e. NAT C. trachomatis screening of donor eligibility and first and last donation, provided these occur within 90 days, is cost advantageous compared with screening of all samples (approximately 75% reduction). CONCLUSION: A negligible risk for C. trachomatis infection was found in recipients when using historical sperm samples stored at the sperm bank. C. trachomatis screening following the ECDC protocol for other STDs is supported as it significantly reduces workload and cost compared with screening all samples.

[Role of full-time nurses in reception of sperm donors in the sperm bank].

OBJECTIVE: To explore the necessity of reception of sperm donors by full-time nurses in the sperm bank by analyzing the efficiency of sperm donation before and after staffing Guangdong Sperm Bank (GSB) with full-time nurses. METHODS: We selected 9 712 qualified sperm donors in GSB from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2021 and compared the efficiency of sperm donation before and after staffing GSB with full-time nurses. RESULTS: After staffing GSB with full-time nurses, the proportion of qualified sperm donors screened from the quasi-qualified ones was dramatically increased from 66.2% (1 230/1 858) to 77.1% (3 252/4 218) (P < 0.01), that of HIV re-examinees after 6-month suspension from sperm donation increased from 84.6% (137/162) to 93.4% (599/641) (P < 0.01), and that of the candidate donors lost to follow-up during the screening period decreased from 23.2% (831/3 583) to 21.3% (1 308/6 129) (P = 0.034). CONCLUSION: After Guangdong Sperm Bank was staffed with full-time nurses for reception of sperm donors, the proportion of the candidate donors lost to follow-up was reduced and the efficiency of sperm donation was significantly improved. Individualized psychological intervention for the sperm donors by the nurses could dispel the worries of the donors and improve the compliance and efficiency of sperm donation.

Ethical Issues in Sperm, Egg and Embryo Donation: Islamic Shia Perspectives.

Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ARTs) have been practiced in Islamic societies within married couples since their introduction. However, there are divergent views over the issue of third-party donation among Sunni and Shia scholars. This paper illustrates the different perspectives of Shia Muslims surrounding, sperm, egg, and embryo donation and ethical aspects thereof. The study reveals that there are different views regarding sperm, egg, and embryo donation among the Shia religious leaders around the world. Many Shia religious scholars, including the Iranian supreme religious leader Ali Hussein Khamenei allow sperm, egg, and embryo donation with certain conditions. However, the conditions stipulated by Shia religious scholars contradict the ethical and legal practices of sperm, egg, and embryo donation. Regarding sperm and egg donation, they declared that the donor child would inherit from a third-party donor and the commissioning parents would be adoptive parents. Thus, according to them, donor anonymity is impossible. Moreover, the Iranian act on embryo donation did not stipulate the right and responsibilities of the donor child and recipient couples and did not clarify the nature and number of embryos that can be donated and implanted. The paper argues that the lack of laws and guidelines on sperm, egg, and embryo donation raises many ethical problems. Based only on religious rulings, third-party donation has been practiced without foreseeing the well-being and safety of donor children, donors, and recipient couples.

Underground Gamete Donation in Sunni Muslim Patients.

This qualitative study focuses on the "underground" practices of Sunni Muslim physicians and patients who are performing and undergoing religiously prohibited third-party gamete donation. It is based on face-to-face interviews with two Sunni Muslim gynecologists and 25 Sunni Muslim women who underwent third-party gamete donation treatments and gave birth to a baby. The analysis of the interviews sheds light on patients' experiences regarding donation and explores the experiences of the gynecologists. The patients shared with us their inner conflict regarding childbearing using either donated sperm or a donated egg. They expressed a subversive attitude toward the religious authorities and the Islamic fatwa (religious ruling) that prohibits third-party gamete donation. The gynecologists provide fertility care involving third-party gamete donation despite Islamic religious prohibitions; in consequence, they suffer feelings of guilt for their actions. The study participants challenge accepted binary conceptions regarding the boundaries between religious laws and the desire to produce offspring, between what is allowed and what is forbidden, between guilt and happiness, and between the desire to maintain a marital relationship and the desire to comply with cultural-religious rules. Based on Gloria Anzaldua's theory of the borderlands, and the context-informed approach, this study underscores the importance of giving voice to Sunni Muslim patients who underwent third-party gamete donation treatments and contributes to a deeper understanding of their dilemma of finding a reproductive solution that does not run counter to religious values.