Author:
Gat Itai,Ronen Maya,Avraham Sarit,Youngster Michal,Hourvitz Ariel,Levtzion-Korach Osnat
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Sperm donation has undergone significant medical and social transformations in recent decades. This study aimed to explore Israeli students’ perceptions towards sperm donation and investigate the potential influence of demographic characteristics on these perceptions.
Design
The study encompassed 254 students from Tel-Aviv University, who completed an anonymous online survey in January–February 2021. This cross-sectional quantitative online survey, comprised 35 questions categorized into three sections: demographic data, assessment of prior knowledge, and perceptions of sperm donation (general perceptions related to both positive and negative stigmas associated with sperm donation, the roles and activities of sperm banks, and considerations surrounding identity disclosure versus the anonymity of sperm donors and their offspring).
Results
Participants exhibited a relatively low level of prior knowledge (mean 31.2 ± 19 of 100). Scores for positive and negative stigmas ranged from 1.3 to 2.2. Notably, the statement “Donors’ anonymity preservation is crucial to maintain sperm donation” received a mean of 3.7. Seeking for anonymous sperm donation identity both by recipients and offspring was ranked with low means (1.5 and 1.7, respectively). However, the pursuit of half-siblings by mothers or siblings themselves received higher ratings ranging from 2.7 to 3. Women’s stigma ranking were notably lower, while men emphasized the importance of donor anonymity.
Conclusions
Sperm Banks hold a position of medical authority rather than being perceived as being commercial entity. The preservation of donor anonymity is widely accepted as a crucial element, prioritized over the requests for identity disclosure from recipients and offspring. Demographic parameters exhibit a strong and precise effects on participants’ perceptions.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference45 articles.
1. Sherman JK. Synopsis of the use of frozen human semen since 1964: state of the art of human semen banking. Fertil Steril. 1973;24(5):397–412.
2. McGovern PG, Schlaff WD. Sperm donor anonymity: a concept rendered obsolete by modern technology. Fertil Steril. 2018;109(2):230–1.
3. Eskenazi B, Pies C, Newstetter A, Shepard C, Pearson K. HIV serology in artificially inseminated lesbians. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 1989;2(2):187–93.
4. Conrad EA, Fine B, Hecht BR, Pergament E. Current practices of commercial cryobanks in screening prospective donors for genetic disease and reproductive risk. Int J Fertil Menopausal Stud. 1996;41(3):298–303.
5. Bitan R, Youngster M, Umanski A, Kaufman S, Kedem A, Avraham S, et al. Critical demographic changes among sperm donation recipients over three decades. Isr Med Assoc J. 2023;25(12):809–14.