Preserving Testicular Tissue and a Boy's Open Reproductive Future

Satkoske, Valerie; Parker, Lisa S.

doi:10.1080/15265161.2013.760984

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The cost of fertility treatment led to proposal of guidelines where two the most important inclusion criteria for experimental gonadal tissue cryopreservation are urged to be a high risk of future infertility and a high likelihood of long-term survival because commercialisation of medical interventions can lead to irrational investments [70]. The annual storage fee for cryopreserved materials could easily become a source of psychological pressure and financial burden rather than future opportunity [71].…”

Section: Practicalities To Consider In Oncofertility Consultationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fertility preservation in cancer patients: The global framework

Linkeviciute

Boniolo

Chiavari

et al. 2014

Cancer Treatment Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cancer treatment is the most frequent cause of reduced fertility in cancer patients, with up to 80% of survivors affected. None of the established or experimental fertility preservation methods can assure parenthood; instead it may provide a future opportunity to overcome treatment induced sterility. Previous research demonstrated that fertility counselling has clinical and psychological benefit. Therefore, such patient services are recommended by internationally recognized guidelines. Around 70-75% of young cancer survivors in retrospective studies are reported to desire parenthood but the numbers of patients who use fertility preservation services prior treatment are significantly lower. Moreover, despite existing guidelines healthcare professionals worldwide lack practical knowledge and have personal biases which prevent addressing fertility preservation issues adequately. Surveys of healthcare professionals report the following barriers: lack of time and knowledge about existing options, poor prognosis, and delay in treatment, patient's age, partnership status, existing children, sexual orientation and socioeconomic situation. Moreover, fertility preservation consultation is not limited to medical aspects. Patient's fears, expectations and priorities shaped by personal values have to be addressed in a light of medical necessities, realistic survival prognosis, socio-cultural environment and availability of resources. We call for a need of framework for patient centred fertility counselling with a proposal that such framework should include support in decision making which would help patients to understand medical aspects of their cancer, realistic fertility preservation options, identify their preferences based on personal values and goals. Optional support services could also include legal guidance, psychological and spiritual support and financial counselling.

show abstract

Section: Practicalities To Consider In Oncofertility Consultationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fertility preservation in cancer patients: The global framework

Linkeviciute

Boniolo

Chiavari

et al. 2014

Cancer Treatment Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, as we have seen above, the same right to an open future is used to ground the parental obligation to preserve their children's fertility, which further grounds (and the discharge of which is dependent upon) their entitlement to be given relevant information if possible (Satkoske and Parker 2013). Thus the right to an open future has inspired conflicting obligations: to obtain important information about one's child, and to not obtain it.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…Rather than opening up the child's reproductive future, pressure to conform to certain expectations may be increased instead (Satkoske and Parker 2013). It can be argued here that the decision, effort, and risks, that their parents undertook in preserving their fertility create expectations for the child to reproduce (Quinn et al 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Preserving children’s fertility: two tales about children’s right to an open future and the margins of parental obligations

Cutas

Hens

2014

Med Health Care and Philos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The sources, extent and margins of parental obligations in taking decisions regarding their children's medical care are subjects of ongoing debates. Balancing children's immediate welfare with keeping their future open is a delicate task. In this paper, we briefly present two examples of situations in which parents may be confronted with the choice of whether to authorise or demand non-therapeutic interventions on their children for the purpose of fertility preservation. The first example is that of children facing cancer treatment, and the second of children with Klinefelter syndrome. We argue that, whereas decisions of whether to preserve fertility may be prima facie within the limits of parental discretion, the right to an open future does not straightforwardly put parents under an obligation to take actions that would detect or relieve future infertility in their children-and indeed in some cases taking such actions is problematic.

show abstract

Should Parents Take Active Steps to Preserve Their Children’s Fertility?

Cutas

2017

Parental Responsibility in the Context of Neuroscience and Genetics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Preserving Testicular Tissue and a Boy's Open Reproductive Future

Cited by 6 publications

References 6 publications

Fertility preservation in cancer patients: The global framework

Fertility preservation in cancer patients: The global framework

Preserving children’s fertility: two tales about children’s right to an open future and the margins of parental obligations

Should Parents Take Active Steps to Preserve Their Children’s Fertility?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About