Reproductive BioMedicine Online
Volume 20, Issue 7 , Pages 880-891, June 2010

Reflections by patients who undergo IVF on the use of their supernumerary embryos for science

  • V. Provoost

      Affiliations

    • Bioethics Institute Ghent, Ghent University, Blandijnberg 2, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium
    • Research Foundation – Flanders (FWO), Brussels, Belgium
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author.
  • ,
  • G. Pennings

      Affiliations

    • Bioethics Institute Ghent, Ghent University, Blandijnberg 2, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium
  • ,
  • P. De Sutter

      Affiliations

    • Department of Reproductive Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
  • ,
  • J. Gerris

      Affiliations

    • Department of Reproductive Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
  • ,
  • A. Van de Velde

      Affiliations

    • Department of Reproductive Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
  • ,
  • M. Dhont

      Affiliations

    • Department of Reproductive Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium

Received 2 July 2009; received in revised form 26 August 2009; accepted 19 January 2010. published online 22 April 2010.

Declaration: The authors report no financial or commercial conflicts of interest.

Abstract 

Interviews were conducted with patients undergoing treatment at the department for reproductive medicine at the University Hospital of Ghent, Belgium to describe how patients think about the use of embryos for science and how patients’ views are related to their decision whether or not to donate their supernumerary embryos for science. Most participants knew little about the use of embryos for science. The perception of science and scientists, rather than the perception of the embryo, played an important role in the disposition decision making. The feeling of not having control over what would happen to their embryo and the fear that scientists would allow their embryo to develop into children were the main arguments against donation. This showed the importance of information about scientific research with embryos, such as the 14-day limit to keep embryos alive. Half of the participants pictured the medical team as the requesting party for their embryos and those who were not willing to donate indicated that they could be persuaded when asked directly by their caregivers. In conclusion, this study suggests that the perception of science, rather than the perception of the embryo, plays an important role in the decision to donate for science.

Keywords: embryo disposition, embryo research, embryonic stem cell research, qualitative research, research embryo creation

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Veerle Provoost has a Master’s degree in Philosophy and in Gerontology and a PhD in Social Health Sciences. Since October 2005, she has been affiliated as a researcher to the Department of Philosophy and Moral Sciences at Ghent University and the Bioethics Institute Ghent where she studies patients’ disposition decisions regarding surplus cryopreserved embryos. Since October 2006, she is a postdoctoral fellow of the research foundation – Flanders (FWO). Her research interests centre on empirical bioethics in the field of reproductive medicine.

PII: S1472-6483(10)00134-3

doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2010.03.009

Reproductive BioMedicine Online
Volume 20, Issue 7 , Pages 880-891, June 2010