6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Reproductive plans and knowledge of assisted reproductive techniques among lesbian women: an international survey study

      research-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

          Objective

          Lesbian couples must resort to adoption or donated semen to achieve parenthood, the latter usually involving assisted reproductive technology. The aim of this study is to assess homosexual women’s knowledge about assisted reproductive techniques, the importance of perceived genetic and gestational relationships for their future mother-child bond, as well as their reproductive plans.

          Methods

          This is an observational study based on an anonymous survey disseminated online in several countries on different continents, addressed to homosexual women.

          Results

          From the 549 participants, most reported being well informed about reproductive options including assisted reproductive technology. The majority want to be a mother as part of a couple, mainly through assisted reproduction or step adoption of their partner’s child. The importance of a genetic or gestational relationships with their future child varies greatly between women. Among the sampled women, pregnancy was believed to have a slightly greater impact on the future mother-child connection compared to genetics.

          Conclusions

          Homosexual women are well informed about the assisted reproductive technology treatments. The majority considers it important to become a mother as a couple, mainly through assisted reproduction or step adoption of their partner’s child. The importance given to gestation or genetic mother-child relationships varies greatly between women, and it seems they believe pregnancy may have a slightly greater impact on the future mother-child connection compared to genetics.

          Related collections

          Most cited references29

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

          Survey on ART and IUI: legislation, regulation, funding and registries in European countries

          Abstract STUDY QUESTION How are ART and IUI regulated, funded and registered in European countries? SUMMARY ANSWER Of the 43 countries performing ART and IUI in Europe, and participating in the survey, specific legislation exists in only 39 countries, public funding (also available in the 39 countries) varies across and sometimes within countries and national registries are in place in 31 countries. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Some information devoted to particular aspects of accessibility to ART and IUI is available, but most is fragmentary or out-dated. Annual reports from the European IVF-Monitoring (EIM) Consortium for ESHRE clearly mirror different approaches in European countries regarding accessibility to and efficacy of those techniques. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION A survey was designed using the online SurveyMonkey tool consisting of 55 questions concerning three domains—legal, funding and registry. Answers refer to the countries’ situation on 31 December 2018. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTINGS, METHODS All members of EIM plus representatives of countries not yet members of the Consortium were invited to participate. Answers received were checked, and initial responders were asked to address unclear answers and to provide any additional information they considered important. Tables of individual countries resulting from the consolidated data were then sent to members of the Committee of National Representatives of ESHRE, asking for a second check. Conflicting information was clarified by direct contact. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE Information was received from 43 out of the 44 European countries where ART and IUI are performed. Thirty-nine countries reported specific legislation on ART, and artificial insemination was considered an ART technique in 35 of them. Accessibility is limited to infertile couples in 11 of the 43 countries. A total of 30 countries offer treatments to single women and 18 to female couples. In five countries ART and IUI are permitted for treatment of all patient groups, being infertile couples, single women and same sex couples, male and female. Use of donated sperm is allowed in 41 countries, egg donation in 38, the simultaneous donation of sperm and egg in 32 and embryo donation in 29. Preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) for monogenic disorders or structural rearrangements is not allowed in two countries, and PGT for aneuploidy is not allowed in 11; surrogacy is accepted in 16 countries. With the exception of marital/sexual situation, female age is the most frequently reported limiting criteria for legal access to ART—minimal age is usually set at 18 years and maximum ranging from 45 to 51 years with some countries not using numeric definition. Male maximum age is set in very few countries. Where permitted, age is frequently a limiting criterion for third-party donors (male maximum age 35 to 55 years; female maximum age 34 to 38 years). Other legal constraints in third-party donation are the number of children born from the same donor (in some countries, number of families with children from the same donor) and, in 10 countries, a maximum number of egg donations. How countries deal with the anonymity is diverse—strict anonymity, anonymity just for the recipients (not for children when reaching legal adulthood age), mixed system (anonymous and non-anonymous donations) and strict non-anonymity. Public funding systems are extremely variable. Four countries provide no financial assistance to patients. Limits to the provision of funding are defined in all the others i.e. age (female maximum age is the most used), existence of previous children, maximum number of treatments publicly supported and techniques not entitled for funding. In a few countries, reimbursement is linked to a clinical policy. The definition of the type of expenses covered within an IVF/ICSI cycle, up to what limit and the proportion of out-of-pocket costs for patients is also extremely dissimilar. National registries of ART and IUI are in place in 31 out of the 43 countries contributing to the survey, and a registry of donors exists in 18 of them. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION The responses were provided by well-informed and committed individuals and submitted to double checking. Since no formal validation was in place, possible inaccuracies cannot be excluded. Also, results are a cross section in time and ART and IUI legislations within European countries undergo continuous evolution. Finally, several domains of ART activity were deliberately left out of the scope of this ESHRE survey. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS Results of this survey offer a detailed view of the ART and IUI situation in European countries. It provides updated and extensive answers to many relevant questions related to ART usage at national level and could be used by institutions and policymakers in planning services at both national and European levels. Study funding/competing interest(s) The study has no external funding, and all costs were covered by ESHRE. There were no competing interests. ESHRE Pages are not externally peer reviewed. This article has been approved by the Executive Committee of ESHRE.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Children raised in mother-headed families from infancy: a follow-up of children of lesbian and single heterosexual mothers, at early adulthood.

            The present investigation constituted the third phase of a longitudinal study of the quality of parent-child relationships and the psychological adjustment of children in female-headed families with no father present from infancy. In this study, 27 families headed by single heterosexual mothers (solo mothers) and 20 families headed by lesbian mothers were compared with 36 two-parent heterosexual families as the child entered adulthood. Data were obtained from mothers and their young adult children by standardized interviews and questionnaires. The female-headed families were found to be similar to the traditional families on a range of measures of quality of parenting and young adults' psychological adjustment. Where differences were identified between family types, these pointed to more positive family relationships and greater psychological wellbeing among young adults raised in female-headed homes. The findings of this study show that children raised by solo heterosexual mothers or lesbian mothers from infancy continue to function well as they enter adulthood. The findings are of relevance to the UK Human Fertilisation and Embryology (2008) Act.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Sharing Motherhood: Maternal Jealousy Among Lesbian Co-Mothers

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: contributed to the conceptionRole: design of this studyRole: acquisition analysisRole: interpretation of dataRole: elaboration of the manuscriptRole: approved its version to be published
                Role: contributed to the conceptionRole: design of this studyRole: acquisition analysisRole: interpretation of dataRole: elaboration of the manuscriptRole: approved its version to be published
                Role: contributed to the conceptionRole: design of this studyRole: acquisition analysisRole: interpretation of dataRole: elaboration of the manuscriptRole: approved its version to be published
                Role: contributed to the conceptionRole: design of this studyRole: acquisition analysisRole: interpretation of dataRole: elaboration of the manuscriptRole: approved its version to be published
                Role: contributed to the conceptionRole: design of this studyRole: acquisition analysisRole: interpretation of dataRole: elaboration of the manuscriptRole: approved its version to be published
                Role: contributed to the conceptionRole: design of this studyRole: acquisition analysisRole: interpretation of dataRole: elaboration of the manuscriptRole: approved its version to be published
                Role: contributed to the conceptionRole: design of this studyRole: acquisition analysisRole: interpretation of dataRole: elaboration of the manuscriptRole: approved its version to be published
                Role: contributed to the conceptionRole: design of this studyRole: acquisition analysisRole: interpretation of dataRole: elaboration of the manuscriptRole: approved its version to be published
                Journal
                JBRA Assist Reprod
                JBRA Assist Reprod
                jbra
                JBRA Assisted Reproduction
                Brazilian Society of Assisted Reproduction
                1517-5693
                1518-0557
                Oct-Dec 2023
                Oct-Dec 2023
                : 27
                : 4
                : 602-609
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Ginemed Porto, Porto, Portugal
                [2 ] Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
                [3 ] Clinical Department of Obstetrics, Perinatology and Gynaecology, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
                [4 ] Fertility Center Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark
                [5 ] Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Centro Hospitalar Tâmega e Sousa, Penafiel, Portugal
                [6 ] Clinical Hospital Nicolae Malaxa, Bucharest, Romania
                [7 ] Riga Stradins University, Riga, Latvia
                [8 ] Department of Emergency Care, Riga East Clinical University, Riga, Latvia
                [9 ] Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Ogre’s Regional Hospital, Ogre, Latvia
                [10 ] Felicittá Fertility Institute, Curitiba, Brazil
                Author notes
                Corresponding author: Pedro Brandão Ginemed Porto Porto, Portugal E-mail: pbrandao@ 123456gmemed.pt ORCID: 0000-0002-1470-184X
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1470-184X
                Article
                10.5935/1518-0557.20230013
                10718543
                37459442
                c74818df-cd07-4888-89bb-f468a1fd251d

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 14 October 2022
                : 21 April 2023
                Categories
                Original Article

                adoption,assisted reproduction technology,ivf,lesbian,reproduction

                Comments

                Comment on this article