Reproductive Biomedicine and Society Online最新文献

If parents have used donated gametes, it is a personal choice whether they disclose to their children. For those that do, there is, however, little advice on how to tell their children. The Donor Conception Network (DCN) has made a series of books to help parents disclose. This study evaluated parents’ experience of using these books. An online survey with both quantitative and qualitative questions was used. The DCN membership and social media were used to publicize the survey, and 108 responses were analysed. At the time of conception, the parents’ family types were mainly mother and father (56.5%) and solo mothers (36.1%). The method of conception was mainly donor spermatozoa (55.6%) followed by donor egg (38.0%), double donation (8.3%) and one case of surrogacy. Most parents had read the book to their children before 2 years of age (76.9%). Before reading the books, some of the parents had some confidence in telling (43.5%) or were very confident in telling (30.6%). After reading the books, 60.2% reported having much more confidence in telling. Most parents felt their children had no understanding (76.8%) or only some understanding (22.3%) of donor conception before reading the books. After reading the books most parents felt their children’s understanding had increased (71.3%). Most parents felt that reading the books had given them more confidence in using donor conception language (90.7%). The use of books to tell children about their conception may be a useful resource for parents wishing to be open with their children.

This article proposes going back in the history of reproductive medicine to shed light on the role of assisted reproductive technology (ART) in the making of ‘old eggs’. Focusing on two key technologies – egg donation and cytoplasmic transfer – both of which contributed significantly to the production of scientific knowledge about reproductive ageing, the article suggests that ART can be analysed as ‘in-vivo models’ playing a pivotal role in the shift from age as a demographic variable to ageing understood in biological terms. It will shed light on the role of ART in locating age in the eggs and producing a cellular understanding of fertility decline. It argues that ART not only offers new means of reconfiguring the biological clock by extending fertility, but also reconfigures the biology of reproductive ageing itself. This becomes both the target and the means for new technological interventions, imaginaries and norms, anchored in women’s bodies and a more plastic biology, and thereby illuminates hitherto underexplored aspects of the encounter between the science and technology of reproduction and anti-ageing.

In the last decade, the in-vitro fertilization (IVF) sector has witnessed a shift from so-called ‘reactive IVF’ to a new model of proactive fertility care. Whereas IVF was traditionally developed to treat people who found they were unable to conceive, the indication for IVF has broadened significantly to include a much wider group of potential patients through a new focus on proactive treatment of future (in)fertilities. This shift combines a number of new trends pertaining to preservation, prediction, private equity and platformization, all of which have gained influence in contemporary assisted reproduction. This article focuses on the emergence of company-sponsored fertility benefits, which combines each of these trends.

Whereas fertility benefits – especially egg freezing insurance – have primarily been discussed in terms of women’s empowerment or disenfranchisement, this article instead calls attention to the discursive, clinical and infrastructural shifts in contemporary assisted reproduction that have emerged with the rising popularity of these benefits. The analysis addresses these underdiscussed aspects of fertility benefits by focusing on the dynamics of demand; the shifts in the rationalization of intensified treatment pathways in the face of new reimbursement practices; and the online, platform-based infrastructures that are built to provide these treatments. In doing so, it analyses how this remaking of fertility towards an ethos of proactive fertility management reflects broader capitalist tailwinds.

Few studies explore in-depth accounts of women’s and men’s experiences with, and transitions between, obstetrician/gynaecologists (OB/GYNs) and reproductive endocrinologists during infertility diagnostic and treatment processes. This study examined this subject matter with data from qualitative, in-depth, semi-structured interviews. Between April 2007 and March 2008, the first author interviewed 20 women and eight men from a large midwestern metropolitan area in the USA who had used, or were in the process of using, any fertility treatment in the 5 years preceding the interview. Six couples and 16 individuals were interviewed, resulting in narratives of 22 distinct infertility journeys. The main complaints made by respondents about OB/GYNs were that they were insufficiently concerned with providing timely treatment and that they paid insufficient attention to male partners. Women felt that their concerns were taken more seriously by reproductive endocrinologists, but complained of insensitivity, depersonalization and misinformation, and were suspicious of a profit orientation.

Childbearing takes place at increasingly older ages, and fertility is continuing to decrease across female birth cohorts. This study investigated whether the proportion of women who unintentionally forwent childbearing increased over time, and linked this to the age profile of fertility intentions and realization among men and women. This study was based on the Austrian Micro-Censuses (1986–2016) and on the Austrian Generations and Gender Surveys (panel data 2008/09 and 2012/13). Across the birth cohorts 1950–1979, an increasing proportion of women wanted to have children after 40 years of age, but more women failed to meet their fertility intentions expressed at 34–36 years of age. At the individual level, from 30 years of age, more than one-third of women and men with a strong fertility intention were found to persist with this intention within four years even at less fertile ages. In addition, women and men with a strong fertility intention became less likely to have a child with age: <10% of women and approximately 20% of men who had expressed a certain and short-term intention to have a child at 39–41 years of age in 2008/09 had a child by 2012/13. In particular, childless women and men, and those with only one child, persisted in certain and short-term positive intentions from 30 years of age, but parity was not a significant factor in their realization. The sharp increase in ‘unrealized fertility’ over time draws attention to the importance that personal circumstances and context encountered at older ages may have for fertility, and augurs a continued increase in the use of assisted reproduction.

The most recent Black Lives Matter moment provides an important opportunity for consideration of the interlocking social and political systems that contribute to ongoing racism and racial inequality. What does this mean in the context of reproductive biomedicine? Which lives do reproductive biomedicine devalue and how? In this commentary, I address why reproductive biomedicine is an important site for reflection on race, and how the Reproductive Justice Movement calls on us to shift our thinking. I argue for the need to recognize the deep connections between reproductive biomedicine and eugenics, and then offer some examples of racialization in reproductive biomedicine through assisted reproductive technology. Finally, I consider what steps practitioners might take to be part of the change for which this Black Lives Matter moment calls.