Volume 12, Issue 3 (4-2014)                   IJRM 2014, 12(3): 169-0 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Alizadeh L, Omani Samani R. Using fertile couples as embryo donors: An ethical dilemma. IJRM. 2014; 12 (3) :169-0
URL: http://journals.ssu.ac.ir/ijrmnew/article-1-522-en.html
1- Medical Ethics and Law Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2- Department of Epidemiology and Reproductive Health at Reproductive Epidemiology Research Center, Royan Institute for Reproductive Biomedicine, ACECR, Tehran, Iran , samani@royaninstitute.org
Abstract:   (41 Views)
The use of donated embryos has offered hope for infertile couples who have no other means to have children. In Iran, fertility centers use fertile couples as embryo donors. In this paper, the advantages and disadvantages of this procedure will be discussed. We conclude that embryo-donation should be performed with frozen embryos thus preventing healthy donors from being harmed by fertility drugs. There must be guidelines for choosing the appropriate donor families. In countries where commercial egg donation is acceptable, fertile couples can be procured as embryo donors thus fulfilling the possible shortage of good quality embryos. Using frozen embryos seems to have less ethical, religious and legal problems when compared to the use of fertile embryo donors.
Full-Text [PDF 301 kb]   (25 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Original Article |
Received: 2017/10/1 | Accepted: 2018/02/1 | Published: 2018/02/1

1. Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Defining embryo donation: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2013; 99: 1846-1487. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.02.029]
2. Hammarberg K, Tinney L. Deciding the fate of supernumerary frozen embryos: a survey of couples' decisions and the factors influencing their choice. Fertil Steril 2006; 86: 86-91. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.11.071]
3. Eydoux P, Thepot F, Fellmann F, Francannet C, Simon-Bouy B, Jouannet P, et al. How can the genetic risks of embryo donation be minimized? Proposed guidelines of the French Federation of CECOS (Centre d' Etude et de Conservation des Oeufs et du Sperme). Hum Reprod 2004; 9: 1685-1688. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/deh328]
4. Bangsboll S, Pinborg A, Yding Andersen C, Nyboe Andersen A. Patients' attitudes towards donation of surplus cryopreserved embryos for treatment or research. Hum Reprod 2004; 19: 2415-2419. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/deh441]
5. Horne G, Critchlow JD, Newman MC, Edozien L, Matson PL, Lieberman BA. A prospective evaluation of cryopreservation strategies in a two-embryo transfer programme. Hum Reprod 1997; 12: 542-547. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/12.3.542]
6. Svanberg AS, Boivin J, Bergh T. Factors influencing the decision to use or discard cryopreserved embryos. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2001; 80: 849-855. [DOI:10.1034/j.1600-0412.2001.080009849.x]
7. Hoffman DI, Zellman GL, Fair CC, Mayer JF, Zeitz JG, Gibbons WE, et al. Cryopreserved embryos in the United States and their availability for research. Fertil Steril 2003; 79: 1063-1069. [DOI:10.1016/S0015-0282(03)00172-9]
8. Riggs R, Mayer J, Dowling-Lacey D, Chi TF, Jones E, Oehninger S. Does storage time influence postthaw survival and pregnancy outcome? An analysis of 11,768 cryopreserved human embryos. Fertil Steril 2010; 93: 109-115. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.09.084]
9. Wilson C, Check JH, Summers-Chase D, Choe JK, Amui J, Brasile D. Effect of the length of time that donated embryos are frozen on pregnancy outcome. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol 2010; 37: 181-182.
10. Reed ML, Hamic A, Caperton CL, Thompson DJ. Live birth after anonymous donation of twice-cryopreserved embryos that had been stored in liquid nitrogen for a cumulative storage time of approximately 13.5 years. Fertil Steril 2010; 94: 2771. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.04.071]
11. Burton PJ, Sanders K. Patient attitudes to donation of embryos for research in Western Australia. Med J Aust 2004; 180: 559-561.
12. Bjuresten K, Hovatta O. Donation of embryos for stem cell research-how many couples consent? Hum Reprod 2003; 18: 1353-1355. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/deg265]
13. Pennings G. Belgian law on medically assisted reproduction and the disposition of supernumerary embryos and gametes. Eur J Health Law 2007; 14: 251-260. [DOI:10.1163/092902707X232971]
14. Kovacs GT, Breheny SA, Dear MJ. Embryo donation at an Australian university in-vitro fertilization clinic: issues and outcomes. Med J Aust 2003; 178: 127-129.
15. Australia V. The Infertility Treatment Act 1995. No. 63 of 1995. Date of assent: 27 Jun 1995. Int Dig Health Legis 1997; 48: 24-33.
16. Embryo donation law, Iran Judicature, Official Gazette of the Islamic Republic of Iran, available at: http://www.dastour.ir/Brows/?lid=245069.
17. Lutjen P, Trounson A, Leeton J, Findlay J, Wood C, Renou P. The establishment and maintenance of pregnancy using in vitro fertilization and embryo donation in a patient with primary ovarian failure. Nature 1984; 307: 174-175. [DOI:10.1038/307174a0]
18. Trounson A, Leeton J, Besanko M, Wood C, Conti A. Pregnancy established in an infertile patient after transfer of a donated embryo fertilised in vitro. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1983; 286: 835-838. [DOI:10.1136/bmj.286.6368.835]
19. Kleegman SJ. Therapeutic donor insemination. Fertil Steril 1954; 5: 7-31. [DOI:10.1016/S0015-0282(16)31504-7]
20. Zegers-Hochschild F, Adamson GD, de Mouzon J, Ishihara O, Mansour R, Nygren K, et al. International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology (ICMART) and the World Health Organization (WHO) revised glossary of ART terminology, 2009. Fertil Steril 2009; 92: 1520-1524. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.09.009]
21. Omani Samani R, Moalem MR, Merghati ST, Alizadeh L. Debate in embryo donation: embryo donation or both-gamete donation? Reprod Biomed Online 2009; 19 (Suppl.): 29-33. [DOI:10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60061-2]
22. Parliment of Iran: The bill of Embryo Donation. Available at: http://rc.majlis.ir/fa/law/ show/93943.
23. Parliament of Iran: Embryo Donation Executive Guideline. Tehran 2005; Available at: http://tarh. majlis.ir/? ShowRule&Rid=5FFAE140-1108-48FD-94 91-097D3CC3149F.
24. ESHRE Task Force on Ethics and Law. III, Gamete and embryo donation. Hum Reprod 2002; 17: 1407-1048. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/17.5.1407]
25. Soderstrom-Anttila V, Foudila T, Ripatti UR, Siegberg R. Embryo donation: outcome and attitudes among embryo donors and recipients. Hum Reprod 2001; 16: 1120-1128. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/16.6.1120]
26. Shirkavand A, Sedigh Sarvestani R, Ezabadi Z, Omani Samani R. Violence experience of infertile women in Iran: a qualitative study. Hum Reprod 2010; 25 (Suppl.): i154-i161.
27. Hashemi R, Akazi A. Evaluation of attitudes and information of embryo recipient couples about medico-legal aspects of embryo donation In Iran. Sci J Forens Med 2007; 13: 102-107.
28. Farimani M, Rabiei S, Amiri I, Bab Alhavaeji H, Mohammad Pour N. The outcome of Pregnancy rate after the embryo donation in natural cycle at Hamedan infertility center. Iran J Obstet Gyneocol Infertil 2008; 11: 253-230.
29. Ahuja KK, Mostyn BJ, Simons EG. Egg sharing and egg donation: attitudes of British egg donors and recipients. Hum Reprod 1997; 12: 2845-2852. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/12.12.2845]
30. Ahuja KK, Simons EG. Cancer of the colon in an egg donor: policy repercussions for donor recruitment. Hum Reprod 1998; 13: 227-231. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/13.1.227]
31. Mosgaard BJ, Lidegaard O, Kjaer SK, Schou G, Andersen AN. Infertility, fertility drugs, and invasive ovarian cancer: a case-control study. Fertil Steril 1997; 67: 1005-1012. [DOI:10.1016/S0015-0282(97)81431-8]
32. Potashnik G, Lerner-Geva L, Genkin L, Chetrit A, Lunenfeld E, Porath A. Fertility drugs and the risk of breast and ovarian cancers: results of a long-term follow-up study. Fertil Steril 1999; 71: 853-859. [DOI:10.1016/S0015-0282(99)00085-0]
33. Burkman RT, Tang MT, Malone KE, Marchbanks PA, McDonald JA, Folger SG, et al. Infertility drugs and the risk of breast cancer: findings from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Women's Contraceptive and Reproductive Experiences Study. Fertil Steril 2003; 79: 844-851. [DOI:10.1016/S0015-0282(02)04950-6]
34. Venn A, Watson L, Bruinsma F, Giles G, Healy D. Risk of cancer after use of fertility drugs with in-vitro fertilization. Lancet 1999; 354: 1586-1590. [DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(99)05203-4]
35. Delvigne A, Rozenberg S. Epidemiology and prevention of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS): a review. Hum Reprod Update 2002; 8: 559-577. [DOI:10.1093/humupd/8.6.559]
36. Madani T, Ghaffari F, Kiani K, Hosseini F. Hysteroscopic polypectomy without cycle cancellation in IVF cycles. Reprod Biomed Online 2009; 18: 412-415. [DOI:10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60101-0]
37. Ahuja KK, Simons EG, Edwards RG. Money, morals and medical risks: conflicting notions underlying the recruitment of egg donors. Hum Reprod 1999; 14: 279-284. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/14.2.279]
38. Melamed RM, Bonetti TC, Braga DP, Madaschi C, Iaconelli A, Borges E. Deciding the fate of supernumerary frozen embryos: parents' choices. Hum Fertil (Camb) 2009; 12: 185-190. [DOI:10.3109/14647270903377186]
39. Steinbock B. Payment for egg donation and surrogacy. Mt Sinai J Med 2004; 71: 255-265.
40. The practice committee of the American society for reproductive medicine, Repetitive oocyte donation. Fertil Steril 2008; 90 (Suppl.): S194-195. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.08.032]
41. Rezaniya Moallem M. Forensic pregnancies in accord with law and Islamic Jurisprudence. 1st Ed. Qum, Boostane Ketabe Qum; 2006.
42. Ahmad NH. Assisted reproduction-Islamic views on the science of procreation. Eubios J Asian Int Bioeth 2003; 13: 59-61.
43. Fadel HE. The Islamic viewpoint on new assisted reproductive technologies. Fordham Urban Law J 2002; 30: 147-157.
44. Dutney A. Religion, Infertility and Assisted Reproductive Technology. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2007; 21: 169-180. [DOI:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2006.09.007]
45. Wang J, Sauer MV. In vitro fertilization (IVF): a review of 3 decades of clinical innovation and technological advancement. Ther Clin Risk Manag 2006; 2: 355-364. [DOI:10.2147/tcrm.2006.2.4.355]
46. Akhoondi M: Infertility is the third common cause of divorce in Iran. Hamshahri-online (news website) October 25, 2007, available at: http://www. hamshahrionline.ir/details/34920.
47. Check ML, Yuan W, Check JH, Swenson K, Lee G, Choe JK. Cumulative probability of pregnancy following IVF with ICSI and fresh or frozen embryo transfer. Arch Androl 2002; 48: 5-7. [DOI:10.1080/014850102753385143]
48. Song T, Liu L, Zhou F, Lin XN, Zhang SY. [Frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) versus fresh embryo transfer in clinical pregnancy rate during in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer]. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi 2009; 89: 2928-2930. (In Chinese)
49. Aflatoonian A, Oskouian H, Ahmadi S, Oskouian L. Can fresh embryo transfers be replaced by cryopreserved-thawed embryo transfers in assisted reproductive cycles? A randomized controlled trial. J Assist Reprod Genet 2010; 27: 357-363. [DOI:10.1007/s10815-010-9412-9]
50. Pelkonen S, Koivunen R, Gissler M, Nuojua-Huttunen S, Suikkari AM, Hyden-Granskog C, et al. Perinatal outcome of children born after frozen and fresh embryo transfer: the Finnish cohort study 1995-2006. Hum Reprod 2010; 25: 914-923. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/dep477]
51. Mau-Holzmann UA. Somatic chromosomal abnormalities in infertile men and women. Cytogenet Genome Res 2005; 111: 317-336. [DOI:10.1159/000086906]
52. Feng C, Wang LQ, Dong MY, Huang HF. Assisted reproductive technology may increase clinical mutation detection in male offspring. Fertil Steril 2008; 90: 92-96. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.06.004]
53. Neri QV, Takeuchi T, Palermo GD. An update of assisted reproductive technologies results in the United States. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2008; 1127: 41- 48. [DOI:10.1196/annals.1434.017]
54. Dasgupta S, Reddy BM. Present status of understanding on the genetic etiology of polycystic ovary syndrome. J Postgrad Med 2008; 54: 115- 125. [DOI:10.4103/0022-3859.40778]
55. Green RF, Devine O, Crider KS, Olney RS, Archer N, Olshan AF, et al. Association of paternal age and risk for major congenital anomalies from the National Birth Defects Prevention Study, 1997 to 2004. Ann Epidemiol 2004; 20: 241-249. [DOI:10.1016/j.annepidem.2009.10.009]
56. Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of biomedical ethics. 5th Ed. New York, Oxford University Press; 2001.

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
Write the security code in the box

Send email to the article author

© 2018 All Rights Reserved | International Journal of Reproductive Biomedicine

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb