Financial compensation of oocyte donors: an Ethics Committee opinion
Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine
Committee members:Judith Daar, Jean Benward, Lee Collins, Joseph Davis, Leslie Francis, Elena Gates, Elizabeth Ginsburg, Sigal Klipstein, Barbara Koenig, Andrew La Barbera, Laurence McCullough, Richard Reindollar, Mark Sauer, Rebecca Sokol, Sean Tipton, Lynn Westphal, …
Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (2016). Financial compensation of oocyte donors: an Ethics Committee opinion. Fertility and sterility. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.09.040
Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Financial compensation of oocyte donors: an Ethics Committee opinion. Fertility and sterility. 2016. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.09.040
Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. "Financial compensation of oocyte donors: an Ethics Committee opinion." Fertility and sterility, 2016.
For EndNote, Zotero or Mendeley:
License
No open license is recorded for this paper. Reuse terms are set by the publisher.
RRM Academy Synopsis
Paying oocyte donors is ethically justified, an ASRM committee holds
A 2016 ASRM Ethics Committee opinion holds that paying women who donate eggs is ethically justified. ASRM is the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. The committee says pay should recognize the donor's time, inconvenience, and discomfort. The document adds no new data.
Key Findings
The committee holds that paying oocyte donors is "justified on ethical grounds," whether the eggs go to help another woman's infertility or to research.
The committee advises that payment recognize what donors go through: screening, ovarian stimulation, and the retrieval procedure.
The committee says the amount should stay the same whatever use the oocytes are put to, how many are retrieved, how good they are, and the donor's ethnicity or other personal traits.
The committee says payment should be fair and not so large that it becomes an undue inducement, meaning pressure that leads donors to discount risks. Higher payments, it says, raise greater concern.
The committee says programs should provide effective disclosure and counseling. It calls it prudent to limit donors to women 21 or older.
The ASRM Ethics Committee's Position
“Financial compensation of women donating oocytes for infertility therapy or for research is justified on ethical grounds.”
Quoted verbatim from this paper.
Interpretation
The document is a committee opinion built on ethical argument and on earlier surveys and analyses the committee cites. The committee calls the data unclear on whether fertility drugs and donation procedures could raise a donor's later health risks. The report reflects the views of committee members. A 2007 document of the same name is superseded by this one.
RRM Context
The opinion starts from donor oocytes inside IVF programs, so the subject is the ethics of payment within that practice. Restorative reproductive medicine works earlier, evaluating both partners and treating the cause of infertility. The committee says the effects of ovarian stimulation on a donor's future health and fertility remain unclear. The gap concerns women who undergo stimulation only to provide oocytes to others.
Our editorial summary of this paper, not the article's abstract.
Abstract
Financial compensation of women donating oocytes for infertility therapy or for research is justified on ethical grounds and should acknowledge the time, inconvenience, and discomfort associated with screening, ovarian stimulation, and oocyte retrieval, and not vary according to the planned use of the oocytes, the number or quality of oocytes retrieved, the number or outcome of prior donation cycles, or the donor's ethnic or other personal characteristics. This document replaces the document of the same name, last published in 2007 (Fertil Steril 2007;88:305-9).
Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, 2019
Ethics and Policy › Reproductive Ethics › Third Party Reproduction · Clinical Guidelines and Standards › Guidelines by Issuing Body › United States Professional Societies
Judith Daar, Jean Benward, Lee Collins, Joseph Davis, Leslie Francis, Elena Gates, Elizabeth Ginsburg, Sigal Klipstein, Barbara Koenig, Andrew La Barbera, Laurence McCullough, Richard Reindollar, Mark Sauer, Rebecca Sokol, Sean Tipton, Lynn Westphal, 0000-0003-0284-2845
J Daar, J Benward, L Collins, Joe Davis, Joey Davis, J Davis, L Francis, E Gates, Liz Ginsburg, Beth Ginsburg, Betsy Ginsburg, E Ginsburg, S Klipstein, Barb Koenig, B Koenig, Andy Barbera, Drew Barbera, A Barbera, Larry McCullough, L McCullough, Rick Reindollar, Dick Reindollar, Rich Reindollar, R Reindollar, M Sauer, Becky Sokol, R Sokol, S Tipton, L Westphal
PMID 28340933 28340933 DOI 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.09.040 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.09.040 Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine et al. 2016, Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine 2016
