Worlds apart or two sides of the same coin? Attitudes, meanings, and motives of potential oocyte and sperm donors in Austria

Abstract

Purpose Gamete donors and recipients of such donations have been explored by previous studies, which mostly focus on postdonation scenarios. Our study analyses the general willingness to donate oocytes or sperm and focuses on differences between potential female and male donors in attitudes, meanings, and motives in a pre-donation setting. Methods An electronic survey (n = 555 students) was used in this anonymous observational study. To enable comparisons between men and women regarding their attitudes, meanings, and motives and their willingness to donate gametes, we designed two separate questionnaires. Results The sample was divided into three groups based on the willingness to donate: potential donors (n = 133; women: 48.1%, men: 51.9%); doubtful donors (n = 207; women: 75.8%, men: 24.2%); and non-donors (n = 215; women: 68.3%, men: 31.7%). The group of potential male donors (39.2%) was significantly larger than the group of potential female donors (16.9%). Significant differences regarding altruism, the meaning of one's self-worth, and passing on the own genes were found between doubtful and potential donors. Potential donors attached less value to altruism but more value to the enhancement of one's selfworth and passing on one's genes than doubtful donors. The motive of passing on one's genes and altruistic motives were more important to men than to women. Conclusion This study helps to create a better understanding of potential donors in the existing donation framework and supports the evaluation of the given regimes in the context of designing an improved framework.

The Relationship Between the Views of University Students About Gamete Donation, Surrogate Motherhood and Alturism

“…According to the research findings, male students are more positive than female students (Table 3). Flatscher-Thöni et al (2020) stated that non-donor women view their oocytes as "part of themselves," "the foundation of future life," or "part of their body" more strongly than any other female or male donor group. Mustafa et al (2018) reported that female students (80.5%) were more opposed to surrogacy than male students (97.6%).…”

“…Personal Information Form: It contained questions aimed at determining participants' certain sociodemographic characteristics such as age, gender, as well as multiple-choice and open-ended questions about gamete donation and surrogacy developed by the researchers based on literature review (Kostić et al, 2021;Ameh et al, 2020;Arieas,2020;Flatscher-Thöni et al, 2020;Şenol et al, 2019;Ogunbode and Obajimi, 2020 In the questionnaire, closed-ended expressions such as "I support/do not support gamete donation (sperm/oocyte), and my acquaintance who wants to be a surrogate mother" was used. Then, these choices were divided into subchoices by estimating the students' answers to these expressions in line with the literature.…”

“…Moreover, the impact of altruism, which is frequently mentioned in the international literature in relation to the concepts of gamete donation (Hogan et al, 2021), sperm donation (O'Reilly et al, 2017), and surrogacy (Walker and Van Zyl, 2017), still remains unclear. From an altruistic perspective, those who have a positive view on the subject tend to help others by giving them the opportunity to have children, feel responsible (Flatscher-Thöni et al, 2020) and see it as an alternative way to start a family (Vesali et al, 2018) and emphasize the importance of sociability and social support (Lamba and Jadva, 2018;Imrie, Jadva, and Golombok, 2019). All these results indicate that the charitableness, responsibility, family, and sociability sub-dimensions of altruism may be effective in the inclusion of third parties in assisted reproductive techniques.…”

Israeli students’ perceptions regarding sperm donation: dilemmas reflections with dominant demographic effect

“…Amid the intricate interplay of evolving medical, ethical and social factors, the demand for sperm donation continues to surge [ 18 ]. While existing studies on perceptions towards sperm donation predominantly concentrate on the perceptions of sperm donors and recipients [ 19 – 22 ], It is imperative to acknowledge that sperm donation is no longer confined to specific population segments; it has become a widespread and pertinent phenomenon. Consequently, a broader research framework is necessary to engage new audiences and communities [ 13 ].…”