5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Parents’ disclosure to their donor-conceived children in the last 10 years and factors affecting disclosure: a narrative review

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          BACKGROUND

          Disclosure of donor conception has been advocated in several jurisdictions in recent years, especially in those that practice identity-release donation. However, research on disclosure decisions has not been consolidated systematically in the last 10 years to review if parents are telling and what factors may be impacting their decisions.

          OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

          Are parents disclosing to their donor-conceived children, and what factors have influenced their disclosure decisions across different contexts and family forms in the last 10 years?

          SEARCH METHODS

          A bibliographic search of English-language, peer-reviewed journal articles published between 2012 and 2022 from seven databases was undertaken. References cited in included articles were manually scrutinized to identify additional references and references that cited the included articles were also manually searched. Inclusion criteria were articles focused on parents (including heterosexual, single mothers by choice, same-sex couples, and transsexual) of donor-conceived persons in both jurisdictions with or without identity-release provisions. Studies focused solely on surrogacy, donors, donor-conceived persons, or medical/fertility staff were excluded as were studies where it was not possible to extract donor-recipient parents’ data separately. Both quantitative and qualitative studies were included. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed and Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tools for Systematic Reviews were used to assess article quality and bias.

          OUTCOMES

          Thirty-seven articles met the inclusion criteria representing 34 studies and 4248 parents (including heterosexual, single, same-sex, and transsexual parents although the majority were heterosexual) from countries with anonymous donation and those with identity-release provisions or who had subsequently enacted these provisions (Australia, Belgium, Finland, France, Hong Kong, Middle East, Spain, Sweden, the UK, and the USA) A general trend towards disclosure was noted across these groups of parents with most disclosing to their donor-conceived children before the age of 10 years. Further, the majority of those who had not yet told, reported planning to disclose, although delayed decisions were also associated with lower disclosure overall. Same-sex and single parents were more likely to disclose than heterosexual parents. There was recognition of disclosure as a process involving ongoing conversations and that decisions were impacted by multiple interacting intrapersonal, interpersonal, and external contextual and social factors. Methodological limitations, such as the different population groups and contexts from which participants were drawn (including that those parents who choose not to disclose may be less likely to participate in research), are acknowledged in integrating findings.

          WIDER IMPLICATIONS

          This review has reinforced the need for a theoretical model to explain parents’ disclosure decisions and research exploring the role of legislative provisions, culture, and donor/family type in decision-making. Greater ongoing access to psychological support around disclosure may be important to promote parent and family well-being.

          Graphical Abstract

          Graphical Abstract

          Interwoven contextual factors influence parents’ disclosure decisions to their donor-conceived children, with an apparent trend towards greater and earlier disclosure noted between 2012 and 2022. ART-D, assisted reproductive technologies and donor gametes.

          Related collections

          Most cited references73

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

          The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Qualitative research synthesis: methodological guidance for systematic reviewers utilizing meta-aggregation.

            Qualitative synthesis informs important aspects of evidence-based healthcare, particularly within the practical decision-making contexts that health professionals work in. Of the qualitative methodologies available for synthesis, meta-aggregation is most transparently aligned with accepted conventions for the conduct of high-quality systematic reviews. Meta-aggregation is philosophically grounded in pragmatism and transcendental phenomenology. The essential characteristics of a meta-aggregative review are that the reviewer avoids re-interpretation of included studies, but instead accurately and reliably presents the findings of the included studies as intended by the original authors. This study reports on the methodology and methods of meta-aggregation within the structure of an a priori protocol and standardized frameworks for reporting of results by over-viewing the essential components of a systematic review report.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Book: not found

              JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Hum Reprod Update
                Hum Reprod Update
                humupd
                Human Reproduction Update
                Oxford University Press
                1355-4786
                1460-2369
                Jul-Aug 2024
                30 April 2024
                30 April 2024
                : 30
                : 4
                : 488-527
                Affiliations
                Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, School of Clinical Sciences, Auckland University of Technology , Auckland, New Zealand
                Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, School of Clinical Sciences, Auckland University of Technology , Auckland, New Zealand
                Author notes
                Correspondence address. Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, School of Clinical Sciences, Auckland University of Technology, Private Bag 92006, Auckland 1142, New Zealand. E-mail: michelle.duff@ 123456aut.ac.nz
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0009-0007-6200-230X
                Article
                dmae010
                10.1093/humupd/dmae010
                11215159
                38687968
                25fad4f0-3312-4156-b913-b7051cd4e39d
                © The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial e-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com

                History
                : 24 July 2023
                : 18 March 2024
                : 08 April 2024
                Page count
                Pages: 40
                Categories
                Review
                AcademicSubjects/MED00460
                AcademicSubjects/MED00905

                Human biology
                gamete donation,sperm donation,oocyte/egg donation,embryo donation,parental disclosure,identity-release,anonymous donation

                Comments

                Comment on this article