Worlds apart or two sides of the same coin? Attitudes, meanings, and motives of potential oocyte and sperm donors in Austria.

PURPOSE: Gamete donors and recipients of such donations have been explored by previous studies, which mostly focus on post-donation scenarios. Our study analyses the general willingness to donate oocytes or sperm and focuses on differences between potential female and male donors in attitudes, meanings, and motives in a pre-donation setting. METHODS: An electronic survey (n = 555 students) was used in this anonymous observational study. To enable comparisons between men and women regarding their attitudes, meanings, and motives and their willingness to donate gametes, we designed two separate questionnaires. RESULTS: The sample was divided into three groups based on the willingness to donate: potential donors (n = 133; women: 48.1%, men: 51.9%); doubtful donors (n = 207; women: 75.8%, men: 24.2%); and non-donors (n = 215; women: 68.3%, men: 31.7%). The group of potential male donors (39.2%) was significantly larger than the group of potential female donors (16.9%). Significant differences regarding altruism, the meaning of one's self-worth, and passing on the own genes were found between doubtful and potential donors. Potential donors attached less value to altruism but more value to the enhancement of one's self-worth and passing on one's genes than doubtful donors. The motive of passing on one's genes and altruistic motives were more important to men than to women. CONCLUSION: This study helps to create a better understanding of potential donors in the existing donation framework and supports the evaluation of the given regimes in the context of designing an improved framework.

Legislation of direct-to-consumer genetic testing in Europe: a fragmented regulatory landscape.

Despite the increasing availability of direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing, it is currently unclear how such services are regulated in Europe, due to the lack of EU or national legislation specifically addressing this issue. In this article, we provide an overview of laws that could potentially impact the regulation of DTC genetic testing in 26 European countries, namely Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. Emphasis is placed on provisions relating to medical supervision, genetic counselling and informed consent. Our results indicate that currently there is a wide spectrum of laws regarding genetic testing in Europe. There are countries (e.g. France and Germany) which essentially ban DTC genetic testing, while in others (e.g. Luxembourg and Poland) DTC genetic testing may only be restricted by general laws, usually regarding health care services and patients' rights.