Department of Social Work, Technological Educational Institute (TEI) of Crete, Stavromenos 71500, Heraklion, Greece. Email: jchlia{at}seyp.teiher.gr
![]() |
Abstract |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Key words: assisted reproductive technologies/gamete donation/infertility/reproduction/surrogacy
![]() |
Introduction |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
In Greece, infertility exists among a large number of individuals since it affects ~1215% of all couples of reproductive age. It is estimated that ~35% of the infertility cases are due to a female factor, 3035% to a male factor and in 20% to both genders, while the remaining 10% are referred to as `unexplained infertility'. It has been estimated that in 1998, the last year for which statistics are available, nearly 2500 pregnancies occurred from all forms of ART from the ~50 medical establishments practising ART. Pre-embryo donation was initialized in Greece in the late 1980s. More than 10 years later, the practice of pre-embryo donation is still limited. The pregnancy rate following pre-embryo donation is considered to be the same as that following oocyte donation (personal communication, B. Tarlatzis, 2001).
Reproductive biotechnology has made enormous progress in the last quarter century, raising serious concerns, more or less justified, e.g. reproductive cloning in human. Particularly if a large majority of the scientific community and society is not ready to accept it, public concern is understandable (Ménézo, 2000). Although ART poses a multitude of ethical questions, since it involves several parties with separate interests, and the decision process to use these technologies is influenced by many social factors, research in the field of social attitudes and intention of using such technology is limited.
Very recently attention has been given to the ethical and legal issues concerning ART (Dickens and Cook, 1999; Fonnest et al., 2000
; Sozos et al., 2000
); others put more emphasis on the risks and benefits of biotechnology in medicine (Macer, 1994
; Ryan, 1996
). Additionally, a limited number of surveys has been carried out with parents of children born after the use of ART (Cederblad et al., 1996
; Braverman et al., 1998
). Yet, there have been limited efforts (in Greece none at all) to determine public attitudes towards ART and intention to use such technology and to educate men and women about it (Genuis et al., 1993
; Zegos-Hochschild, 1999; The Bertarelli Foundation Scientific Board, 2000
).
The purpose of the present analysis was to investigate how a population living in urban areas of Greece perceives gamete donation and surrogacy (GDS), as well as its intention for potential gamete receiving or donation. This is the first time that such a research has been conducted in Greece on the topic of the attitudes and intentions towards GDS. This study, therefore, has three main objectives: (i) to determine the sociological profile of the individuals that would use GDS, i.e. would receive or donate sperm, oocyte, and uterus for managing infertility; (ii) to assess the intention to receive or donate sperm, oocyte, and uterus to or from any of the partners, family persons or others via GDS in case of a fertility problem, and (c) to explore possible motivational patterns, concerning procreation and ART that might influence public's intention to use GDS technologies.
![]() |
Materials and methods |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Methods for collecting information
It was decided to perform personal interviews and interviewers were controlled for at each stage of the fieldwork in order to prevent potential errors occurring during data collection. For that purpose the following measures were taken: (i) use of a team of social workers who had received appropriate training, and who were supervised by the researcher; (ii) design of an easy-to-use questionnaire; (iii) consent requested and received by all subjects prior to the completion of the questionnaire and after informing them of the aims of the study; (iv) general instructions given on how to complete the questionnaire; (v) protection of subjects' rights to anonymity and confidentiality and (vi) quality control by the validation of 10% of the completed questionnaires randomly selected. The response rate was 95%.
Questionnaire and measures
A pilot study with a sample of 30 individuals preceded the present study. For the purposes of the pilot study, the interviewers used a questionnaire with open-ended questions referring to motivations and attitudes towards GDS. This instrument was evaluated by several physicians experienced in ART, as well as by people who had recourse to GDS. The final questionnaire, used in the study, was the result of a combination of an already existing questionnaire (Genuis et al., 1993) and the conclusions of the pilot study. Therefore, a new questionnaire has been developed, with 50 different items and divided in two sections:
The first section referred to the socio-demographic background of the sample including gender, age, marital status, educational level, profession, number of children, voting preferences and church attendance.
The second section was subdivided into two parts. The first part included six items assessing the intention of men and women to use GDS, or encourage another person to act in a similar way, i.e. receiving/donating sperm, oocyte, and uterus fromto brother/sister/close relative, friend, unrelated healthy person, and/or the refusal of these medical technologies. The composite score of these six items formed the scale of the `intention to use GDS'. Responses to the six items were averaged to obtain the score on the scale. Its internal consistency, as measured by Cronbach's , was 0.88. The second part comprised a question with 15 items, resulting from the pilot study and measuring the motivational patterns that lead a person to have recourse or not to medical technology in order to manage infertility. Each item was formulated as a statement. The interviewees were asked, `to state the significant reasons that would motivate or inhibit a man or a woman to use GDS, as a solution to his or her infertility'. Examples of statements were: `I wish to fulfil my male/female role by giving birth to a child...', or `pregnancy is the best proof of femininity/masculinity', or `I want to have the physical and emotional experience of pregnancy', or `gestation is the result of emotional relations and not of technological substitutes', or `we trust in God and not in biomedical science for having a child' etc. The respondents were asked to rate each statement on a four point Likert-type scale that ranged from 1 (disagree) to 4 (agree).
Statistical analysis
The initial statistical process used was principal components analysis (PCA) and the data modelling was constructed through multiple linear regression. PCA with varimax rotation was used in one initial run for the 15 items measuring the motivational patterns. The PCA was chosen for two main reasons: first, in order to reveal the `latent' variables (factors) and second, in an effort to reduce the large number of the variables.
Table I presents the results of the PCA analysis. The final factor solutions for the analyses met four criteria: (i) each one was based on factors with an eigenvalue >2.0; (ii) each individual item was correlated with the factor concerned at the 0.40 level or above; (iii) each item included had no significant correlation with another factor, and (iv) only items with a communality of >0.50 were selected.
|
The multiple regression method was used to assess the relationship among several independent/predictor variables and the outcome/dependent variable. Multiple regression was selected because the outcome variable was continuous, i.e. a composite score of the rates of the intention to use or not GDS. The following variables entered in the regression analysis as independent variables: (i) socio-demographic characteristics (gender, age in years, number of children); (ii) Socio-economic characteristics (educational level, in years of education, and six professional categories: scientists and self-employed, traders, shop assistants and officers, etc., blue collar workers, housewives, students and unemployed etc.). (iii) Voting preferences (socialist, liberal, and other) and church attendance (ranged from 0 = never to 5 = every Sunday) and (iv) the two motivational indicators (the factors were extracted by the PCA).
![]() |
Results |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
|
|
Multiple regression analysis
Table IV presents the regression coefficients and the associated level of significance for the two factors, describing the motivational indicators of the participants, and the socio-demographic characteristics on the composite score of the `intention to use GDS'. Results from this model suggest that the factor of `traditional gender roles' is associated with `intention to use GDS'. These data suggest that participants who reported traditional motivated patterns are more in favour of using GDS. Also, the factor of `confidence in emotional relationships' is negatively associated with `intention to use GDS', suggesting that men and women who strongly expressed their confidence to the emotional relationship with their partner are less likely to use GDS (regression coefficients 0.58 and 1.49 respectively).
|
![]() |
Discussion |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
In similar studies coming from countries with more developed medical systems and with a wider dissemination of relevant campaigns (e.g. USA and Canada), acceptability of GDS is much higher (~89%) compared with that reported in the present study (Kazen et al., 1995; Ravin et al., 1997
). Furthermore, support for sperm and oocyte donation decreases with increasing distance between the donor and the recipient (Genuis et al., 1993
). On the contrary, our results suggest that maintenance of anonymity in Greece constitutes a very important concern, because the likelihood of donor's contact with the resulting children is significant, endangering family stability.
Health promotion services in Greece should focus their efforts on the general population and specifically on couples with infertility problems, reinforcing acceptability and trust in reproductive technologies. As noted above, it is often difficult for such couples to address openly their infertility problem and this lack of openness diminishes their chances of seeking a solution (The Bertarelli Foundation Scientific Board, 2000). Our data point out that health promotion services should seriously take into consideration that such couples may see themselves as defective, because they have internalized the social norms expressed in gender roles (Whiteford et al., 1995). Therefore, physicians and social scientists should put more emphasis on helping such couples reconcile with medical reproductive technologies and especially women, who are more reluctant than men to have recourse to gamete donation.
The positive relationship between the `traditional gender roles' and the `intention to use GDS' adds a new dimension to the debate over infertility and its treatment. This survey is a first attempt to offer the necessary tools for designing interventional campaigns, based not only on socio-demographic factors or information on ART, but also on people's motivations to use GDS. People with serious fertility problems, reluctant to undergo ART even if they are adequately informed, could be further encouraged by appropriate health campaigns. The aim of these campaigns should be not only to reinforce their trust in medical reproductive technologies, but also to convince couples with fertility problems that gamete receiving would increase their chances of fulfilling their social roles by giving new members to the society or another meaning to their life. Similarly to the present results, previous research has emphasized the emotional needs of infertile couples and the importance of the ingrained societal expectations concerning human reproduction (Robinson and Stewart, 1989; Tarlatzis et al., 1993
; Papaligoura and Papagounos, 1996
; Ravin et al., 1997
).
Our data show also a strong negative association between the motivational pattern of `confidence in emotional relationship' and the `intention to use GDS'. It appears that motives derive from the emotional relationship between the partners and their belief in God. It is possible that these couples experience the latent fear that natural reproductive behaviour is replaced by an artificial medicalized method of reproduction. Thus, they prefer tightening their emotional relationship with their partner and trusting in God, firmly avoiding the use of GDS. However, it should be noted that fear towards the new reproductive technologies could be attributed, at least in part, to lack of trust towards such technologies. Besides, it seems that the family environment and the relationship of the partners provide a feeling of security that inhibits them from using new methods for solving their infertility problems. It is evident that the socio-cultural context in which these technologies are implemented is a vital factor for people's perceptions. Therefore physicians and health promoting professionals, in consultation with the public, should have the primary responsibility for clarifying the limits and the meaning of these very useful treatments.
Finally, the sociological characteristics of the investigated population did not have a significant effect on the `intention to use GDS'. However, similar to other studies (Genuis et al., 1993; Kazen et al., 1995
; Ravin et al., 1997
), men are better supporters than women of gamete receiving and donation. It is possible that this attitude is mainly due to men's minor physical involvement in the GDS procedure and, simultaneously, to their stronger desire for having descendants.
In conclusion, urban Greek men's and women's intention to use GDS varies, depending on the type of reproductive material used and their relationship with the donor/recipient. The acceptability of receiving or donating sperm and oocytes is relatively high, taking into consideration that the implementation of such technologies in Greece is recent. Specific motivational patterns contribute to encourage or discourage couples from claiming recourse to ART as a solution to their fertility problems.
![]() |
Acknowledgements |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
![]() |
References |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Cederblad, M., Friberg, B., Ploman, F., Sjoberg, N.O., Stenqvist, K. and Zackrisson, E., (1996) Intelligence and behaviour in children born after in-vitro fertilization treatment. Hum. Reprod., 11, 20522057[Abstract]
Dickens, B.M. and Cook, R.J. (1999) Some ethical and legal issues in assisted reproductive technology. Int. J. Gynecol. Obstet., 66, 5561[ISI][Medline]
Eisenberg, V.H. and Schenker, J.G. (1998) Pre-embryo donation: ethical and legal aspects. Int. J. Gynecol. Obstet., 60, 517.[ISI][Medline]
Fonnest, I.F., Sondergaard, F., Fonnest, G. and Jacobsen, A.V. (2000) Attitudes among health care professionals on the ethics of assisted reproductive technologies and legal abortion. Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand., 79, 4953[ISI][Medline]
Genuis, S.J., Chang, W.C. and Genuis, C.K. (1993) Public attitudes toward assisted reproductive technology. Can. Med. Assoc. J., 149, 15361[Abstract]
Kazen, R., Thompson, L.A., and Templeton, A. (1995) Current attitudes towards egg donation among men and women. Hum. Reprod., 10, 154348[Abstract]
Macer, D.R. (1994) Perceptions of risks and benefits of in vitro fertilization, genetic engineering and biotechnology. Soc. Sci. Med., 38, 2333[ISI][Medline]
Ménézo, Y.J.R., Veiga, A. and Pouly, J.L. (2000) Assisted Reproductive Technology in humans, facts and uncertainties. Theriogenology, 53, 599610[ISI][Medline]
Papaligoura, Z. and Papagounos, G. (1996) Assisted Reproductive Technology: psychological and ethical issues, In Nakou, S., Panthelakis, S. (eds) The Child in the World of Tomorrow. Elsevier Science Ltd., U.K.
Ravin, J.A., Mahowalf, B.M. and Stocking, B.C. (1997) Genes or gestation? attitudes of women and men about biologic ties to children. J. Womens Health, 6, 639647[ISI][Medline]
Robinson, G.E. and Stewart, D.E (1989) Motivation for motherhood and the experience of pregnancy. Can. J. Psychiatry, 34, 861866[ISI][Medline]
Ryan, M. (1996) Using willingness to pay to assess the benefits of assisted reproductive techniques. Health Econ., 5, 543558[ISI][Medline]
Sozos, J., Fassouliotis, M.D., Joseph, G. and Schenker, M.D. (2000) Ethics and assisted reproduction. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol., 90, 171180[ISI][Medline]
Tarlatzis, I., Tarlatzis, B.C., Diakoyannis, I., Bontis, J., Lagos, S., Gavriilidou, D. and Mantalenakis, S. (1993) Psychological impacts of infertility on Greek couples. Hum. Reprod., 8, 396401[Abstract]
The Bertarelli Foundation Scientific Board (2000) Public perception on infertility and its treatment: an international survey. Hum. Reprod., 15, 330334
Whiteford, L.M, and Gonzalez, L. (1995). Stigma. The hidden burden of infertility. Soc. Sci. Med., 40, 2736[Medline]
Zegers-Hochschild, F. (1999) Attitudes towards reproduction in Latin American. Teaching the use of modern reproductive technologies. Hum. Reprod. Update, 5, 2125
Submitted on October 18, 2001; resubmitted on March 8, 2002; accepted on April 24, 2002.
|