Talk:Egg donation

Consolidating "Why do people proceed with egg donation?" with "Donor motivation and compensation"

I believe these two sections should be merged because they deal with similar topics. "The egg donor's process in detail" should also be merged and consolidated with the Procedure section, and possibly shortened to be more concise.

Additionally, the section on the "Sociological perspectives on the donor" is more opinionated than factual, and should be re-written to provide a more factual explanation, or removed altogether. The section also contains an incorrectly cited study that should have been referenced with a footnote:

"Women, love, altruism and the family are, as a group, [viewed as] radically separate and opposite from men, self-interested rationality, work and market exchange" (Nelson and England, 2002).

10:14, 6 February 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cho5.wells (talk • contribs)

Telling the Child

The section “telling the child” does not conform to the Neutral Point of View pillar because it is biased against parents who chose to not disclose donor conception. The section about why parents are reluctant to tell their children needs to be more balanced. Currently the reasons cited for parents not telling their children are about others i.e. public shame or issues with extended family members. It makes it sound like the parents who chose not to disclose the donor information to their children are bad parents but a study done on heterosexual couples has shown that parents, regardless of their decision, prioritize the child’s best interests. Thus the following text needs to be added to the page.

A systematic review of factors contributing to parental decision-making in disclosing donor conception has shown that parents cite the child’s best interest as the main factor they use to make the decision. Parents who disclose donor conception to the child emphasize the importance of an honest parent-child relationship while parents who do not disclose express their desire to protect the child from social stigma or other trauma.

References

Theresa Erickson

The reference to Theresa Erickson seems more like an advertisement than objective information. I think it should be removed.

Risk of pregnancy?

There is a conflict of facts on this page:

• After retrieval, the ova are handed over to the recipient couple, fertilized by the sperm of the male partner in the laboratory, and after several days, the resulting embryo(s) is placed in the uterus of the recipient.
• The egg donor may suffer complications from IVF, such as bleeding from the oocyte recovery procedure, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, rarely, liver failure, as well as unintended pregnancy.

By what method is the donor risking pregnancy? --Kickstart70 00:31, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

If someone isn't going to respond to this, I'm just going to remove that section for apparent inaccuracy. --Kickstart70-T-C 15:47, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. It doesn't make sense; I'm getting rid of it. Puddleglum 22:33, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, what they mean is that not all eggs might be recovered during the surgery. It's easy to see that an egg donor might suffer bleeding from the surgery or OHS from the ovulation-inducing drugs. It's also easy to see that if they don't manage to remove absolutely every egg during the surgery, then the egg donor could get pregnant with one of the "leftover" eggs. WhatamIdoing 20:20, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the Risks Section

The third paragraph within the "Egg donor" subsection of "Risks" discusses how "The long-term impact of egg donation on donors has not been well studied, but because the same medications and procedures are used, it should be essentially the same as the long-term impact (if any) of IVF on patients using their own eggs." I would like to suggest including the following information: Increasingly wide use of egg-harvesting procedures in IVF has led to a general assumption that egg collection practices are safe. This may not be true. Problematically, most of the procedures have actually been conducted in private fertility clinics without independent oversight. Moreover, existing research based on voluntary reporting by egg donors is very limited.

Egg Retrieval Process

The egg retrieval procedure is also referred to as egg aspiration, or egg pickup. In order to get sufficient eggs for the in vitro fertilization process, the woman is stimulated with injected medications to develop multiple egg development. The injections are usually done by the woman, or by her husband. The eggs develop in fluid filled structures in the ovaries called follicles. Each follicle can be seen and measured by ultrasound and contains one microscopic egg. When the woman's follicles are mature (determined by ultrasound and hormone measurements), the egg aspiration procedure is performed to remove the eggs from the ovaries. Powerful anesthesia medications are given through an IV so that the woman is "out" during the egg retrieval procedure. She will not feel or remember anything. A needle is passed through the top of the vagina under ultrasound guidance to get to the ovary and follicles. The fluid in the follicles is aspirated through the needle and the eggs detach from the follicle wall and are sucked out of the ovary. The actual IVF egg aspiration procedure usually takes 5-10 minutes at a IVF clinic. The oocyte-cumulus complex is removed from the follicle when we aspirate the fluid through the needle. When all of the follicles have been aspirated, the woman is monitored closely for about 1 hour - after which she is discharged home.

External links

I added a link to this directory of egg donor agencies and fertility clinics because it provides useful npov information for people thinking about egg donation. ----— Bloggeroo (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 20:41, 20 May 2007 (UTC).

The Blog was removed per the per External links policy's Links normally to be avoided.--Hu12 16:05, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

The links for outside egg donation agencies were removed because they were for businesses not true information: MDG 07:54, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

dead link

I Have deleted the following because the link to the footnote #58 is dead... Not enough solid evidence that this is accurate...

In the Muslim community, Sunnis are allowed fertility treatments that do not involve third parties. This rule does not allow for the donation of gametes. Shi’ite Muslims on the other hand are allowed to accept egg donations, although there are some details that prevent egg donation in some countries and regions.[58]

Gabbiej44 (talk) 18:00, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Article name

Does anyone object to moving this to egg donation? It's a broader term which includes the donor, the recepient and the child. Richard001 07:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Text needing revise

I think the following text really needs some references before reinsertion. Mikael Häggström (talk) 10:20, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

There are rare cases where the egg donor can acquire cancer from hormone treatment. Cancer can develop from the usage of hormones that is given to the egg donor to develop more than one fertile egg. After the eggs have matured the patient will undergo anesthesia treatment while the doctor is removing the mature eggs and complications may occur while the doctor is removing the eggs. Such complications are puncture of bowel, bladder, and blood vessels. The patient can also undergo long lasting infection which can cause infertility or decrease fertility in the patient.

These two paragraphs also need revising: (edwikiit - Jan 2015)

→"Since this process is so invasive (much more so than its counterpart, sperm donation), in countries that prohibit compensation there is an extreme dearth of young women willing to go through this procedure. Additionally, in most countries where it is legal and compensated, the law places a cap on the compensation and that cap tends to be in the vicinity of $1000–$2000. In the US, no law caps the compensation but the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) requires member clinics to abide by ASRM standards, which provide that "sums of $5,000 or more require justification and sums above $10,000 are not appropriate."[20] The "justification" for payments over $5000 may include previous successful donations, unusually good family health history, or membership in minority ethnicities for which it is more difficult to find donors.

→As a result of these legal and financial differences around the world, egg donation in the US is far more expensive than it is in other countries. For instance, at one top US clinic it costs more than $26,000 plus the donor's medications (another several thousand dollars).[21] In contrast, at a top Czech clinic it costs 4500 Euros (approximately $6000) including the donor's medication.[22] However, in the US the recipient's ability to choose donors with the desired characteristics (e.g., strong physical resemblance to recipient; same ethnicity and/or religion as recipient; excellent academic background; musical or athletic talent; etc.) is unparalleled. Thus, many patients come to the US in order to benefit from that range of options. In contrast, many US patients travel abroad for egg donation, sacrificing their ability to hand-pick a donor in exchange for significantly lower costs."

–first of all, these two paragraphs are repeated both in the History section, as well as the Legality and Financial Issues section. Given the more factual nature, I suggest these two paragraphs be retained in the latter section, while deleted from the History section. There is also some wording that does not read neutral. For instance, to write "so invasive" implies negativity, and make it seem a strong factor in terms of the 'dearth of women' donors. However, it could simply be the lack of compensation. If the invasiveness truly is an issue, I'd prefer if someone was able to add a reference to a study supporting this conclusion. Below, is a suggested edit of these two paragraphs:

→"In countries that prohibit compensation there is an extreme dearth of young women willing to go through this procedure. Additionally, in most countries where it is legal and compensated, the law places a cap on the compensation and that cap tends to be in the vicinity of $1000–$2000. In the US, no law caps the compensation, but the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) requires member clinics to abide by ASRM standards, which provide that "sums of $5,000 or more require justification and that sums above $10,000 are not appropriate."[20] The "justification" for payments over $5000 may include previous successful donations, unusually good family health history, or membership in minority ethnicities for which it is more difficult to find donors. →As a result of these legal and financial differences around the world, egg donation in the US is much more expensive than it is in other countries. For instance, at one top US clinic it costs more than $26,000, plus the donor's medications (another several thousand dollars).[21] In contrast, at a top Czech clinic it costs 4500 Euros (approximately $6000), including the donor's medication.[22] However, in the US the recipient's ability to choose donors with the desired characteristics (e.g., strong physical resemblance to recipient; same ethnicity and/or religion as recipient; excellent academic background; musical or athletic talent; etc.) is unparalleled. Thus, many patients come to the US in order to benefit from that range of options. In contrast, many US patients travel abroad for egg donation, sacrificing their ability to hand-pick a donor in exchange for significantly lower costs."'

egg donation age

whats the legal age to donate your eggs? because I'v read said you have to be at least 18 or 21 and I cant find anything about the specific ages for states and I'v not sure what the age for my state is. also can minors have the procedure done with a parents permission or is there an age limit for heath reasons of the recipient? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Themountaingoats (talk • contribs) 15:15, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a discussion forum. Still, if you find a reliable source on the topic, feel free to add it to the article. Mikael Häggström (talk) 10:43, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Sociological Perspectives on the Donor

This section does not maintain or encourage a neutral point of view. If this section is going to be included, there should be another section about sociological perspectives on the receiver, not just the donor. The reasons for separate treatments that are said to be caused by biological differences between males and females are unfounded. The quote by Nelson and England reinforces the stereotype that women are “soft” and donate because they are more altruistic and group-oriented than men. Likewise, the quote bolsters the notion that men care primarily how their services benefit society. While reinforcing gender stereotypes, this section also reinforces the gender binary as any biological difference is socially constructed to fit the image of “man” and “woman.” Including content from studies that suggest medical staff can be disgusted by certain patients does not further the mission of this page. This section also uses “cultural norms” as a base of discussion without ever mentioning what that might be or how this term is problematic for a discussion that relies on a strict gender binary. The American Sociological Review article should be used in this section, but it should be clearer as to how the article, which compares egg and sperm donation, relates specifically to women. Mentioning sperm donation in such a small section muddles the mission of the section. AAH6671 (talk) 18:15, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Religious Views

Right now there are some problems with the final paragraph on Judaism and egg donation- the only source listed is from the Center for Advanced Torah Study for Women. This section could benefit from additional links from less Orthodox sources, though finding anything academic on the subject is not easy. Here's how I would re-word so far:

In the Orthodox Jewish community there is no consensus as to whether an egg donor needs to be Jewish in order for the child to be considered Jewish from birth.[59] In the 1990s religious authorities said that if the birth mother was Jewish that the child would be Jewish as well, but in the past few years rabbis in Israel have begun to reconsider, which in turn is causing more debate around the world. Conservative Rabbi Elliot Dorff has suggested that there are arguments for both sides (birth mother or genetic mother) in religious Scripture. Dean of the Center for the Jewish Future at Yeshiva University believes that any child where the birth mother or the genetic mother isn't Jewish should go through a conversion process in infancy, to be sure that their Judaism isn't questioned later in life. [60][61] This is not an issue in the reform community for two reasons. First, only one parent must be Jewish for the child to be considered Jewish; thus, if the father is Jewish, the mother's religion is irrelevant. Second, if the mother who carries the pregnancy and gives birth is Jewish, reform Jews will generally consider that child to be Jewish from birth because it was born of a Jewish mother. [62]

References

Citizenship

There is currently no mention of the problems with the citizenship and legal status of the children resulting from surrogacy arrangements. The Hague Conference Permanent Bureau identified the question of citizenship of these children as a "pressing problem" in the Permanent Bureau 2014 Study (Hague Conference Permanent Bureau, 2014a: 84-94). According to U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Consular Affairs, for the child to be a U.S. citizen one or both of the child's genetic parents must be a U.S. citizen. In other words, the only way for the child to acquire U.S. citizenship automatically at birth is if they are biologically related to a U.S. citizen. Further, in some countries, the child will not be a citizen of the country in which they are born because the surrogate mother is not legally the parent of said child. This could result in a child being born without citizenship. Emma593 (talk) 22:17, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Egg donation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090311165943/http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090226.wldonor26/BNStory/lifeFamily/home to http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090226.wldonor26/BNStory/lifeFamily/home

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:54, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Egg donation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.obgmanagement.com/srm/pdf/first_live_birth_donation.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141105151107/http://www.ngdt.co.uk/donation-and-the-law to http://www.ngdt.co.uk/donation-and-the-law
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110708125320/http://www.ccivf.com/pdf_files/pdf%20articles/CATEGO~6/003.PDF to http://www.ccivf.com/pdf_files/pdf%20articles/CATEGO~6/003.PDF
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.library.nhs.uk/womenshealth/ViewResource.aspx?resID=245239
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141105174451/http://www.yoatzot.org/article.php?id=112 to http://www.yoatzot.org/article.php?id=112

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:53, 18 September 2017 (UTC)