8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Lesbian shared IVF: the ROPA method: a systematic review

      review-article
      a , b , * , , c
      Porto Biomedical Journal
      Wolters Kluwer
      fertilization in vitro, Lesbian, ROPA, Shared IVF

      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

          The ROPA (Reception of Oocytes from PArtner) method, also known as lesbian shared IVF (in vitro fertilization), is an assisted reproduction technique for female couples, in which one of the women provides the oocytes (genetic mother) and the other receives the embryo and gestates (gestational mother). As a double parented method, it is the only way lesbian women may biologically share motherhood. This is a narrative review of data concerning ROPA published in PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library. A total of 35 articles were included, 10 about motivations for undergoing ROPA, 13 about ethics or legislation, 4 about motherhood, and 8 studies reporting clinical outcomes. Despite being used for more than a decade, there is a paucity of data regarding this technique in scientific literature. Most women choose this technique to share biological motherhood, but medical issues may also justify its use. Many ethical and legal issues are still to be solved. Despite the small number of studies, data regarding the outcomes of this technique and the resulting motherhood are reassuring.

          Related collections

          Most cited references51

          • 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

            ESHRE Task Force on Ethics and Law 23: medically assisted reproduction in singles, lesbian and gay couples, and transsexual people†.

            This Task Force document discusses ethical issues arising with requests for medically assisted reproduction from people in what may be called 'non-standard' situations and relationships. The document stresses that categorically denying access to any of these groups cannot be reconciled with a human rights perspective. If there are concerns about the implications of assisted reproduction on the wellbeing of any of the persons involved, including the future child, a surrogate mother or the applicants themselves, these concerns have to be considered in the light of the available scientific evidence. When doing so it is important to avoid the use of double standards. More research is needed into the psychosocial implications of raising children in non-standard situations, especially with regard to single women, male homosexual couples and transsexual people.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Sharing Motherhood: Maternal Jealousy Among Lesbian Co-Mothers

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Porto Biomed J
                PBJO
                pbj
                Porto Biomedical Journal
                Wolters Kluwer (Maryland, MD )
                2444-8664
                2444-8672
                Mar-Apr 2023
                10 April 2023
                : 8
                : 2
                : e202
                Affiliations
                [a ] Department of Reproductive Medicine, Instituto Valenciano de Infertilidad, Valencia, Spain
                [b ] Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal
                [c ] Feliccita Fertility Clinic, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author. Address: Plaza de la Policia Local 3, 46015, Valencia, Spain, E-mail address: pedro.brandao@ 123456ivirma.com
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1470-184X
                Article
                PBJ-D-21-00102 00001
                10.1097/j.pbj.0000000000000202
                10158901
                37152625
                d4494bbb-ec9a-4f06-91d9-d3789e450697
                Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of PBJ-Associação Porto Biomedical/Porto Biomedical Society. All rights reserved.

                This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CCBY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 08 October 2021
                : 09 January 2023
                Categories
                Review Article
                Custom metadata
                TRUE

                fertilization in vitro,lesbian,ropa,shared ivf
                fertilization in vitro, lesbian, ropa, shared ivf

                Comments

                Comment on this article