Irish public opinion on assisted human reproduction services: Contemporary assessments from a national sample.
10.5653/cerm.2013.40.4.169
- Author:
David J WALSH
1
;
E Scott SILLS
;
Gary S COLLINS
;
Christine A HAWRYLYSHYN
;
Piotr SOKOL
;
Anthony P H WALSH
Author Information
1. Division of Reproductive Endocrinology, The Sims Institute/Sims IVF, Dublin, Ireland.
- Publication Type:Legislation ; Original Article
- Keywords:
Assisted fertility;
Legislation;
Public policy;
In vitro fertilization;
Ireland
- MeSH:
Adult;
Anonyms and Pseudonyms;
Child;
Surveys and Questionnaires;
Disclosure;
Fertility;
Fertilization in Vitro;
Humans*;
Infertility;
Ireland;
Jurisprudence;
Privacy;
Public Opinion*;
Public Policy;
Recognition (Psychology);
Reproduction*;
Reproductive Techniques;
Social Class;
Telephone;
Tissue Donors
- From:Clinical and Experimental Reproductive Medicine
2013;40(4):169-173
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE: To measure Irish opinion on a range of assisted human reproduction (AHR) treatments. METHODS: A nationally representative sample of Irish adults (n=1,003) were anonymously sampled by telephone survey. RESULTS: Most participants (77%) agreed that any fertility services offered internationally should also be available in Ireland, although only a small minority of the general Irish population had personal familiarity with AHR or infertility. This sample finds substantial agreement (63%) that the Government of Ireland should introduce legislation covering AHR. The range of support for gamete donation in Ireland ranged from 53% to 83%, depending on how donor privacy and disclosure policies are presented. For example, donation where the donor agrees to be contacted by the child born following donation, and anonymous donation where donor privacy is completely protected by law were supported by 68% and 66%, respectively. The least popular (53%) donor gamete treatment type appeared to be donation where the donor consents to be involved in the future life of any child born as a result of donor fertility treatment. Respondents in social class ABC1 (58%), age 18 to 24 (62%), age 25 to 34 (60%), or without children (61%) were more likely to favour this donor treatment policy in our sample. CONCLUSION: This is the first nationwide assessment of Irish public opinion on the advanced reproductive technologies since 2005. Access to a wide range of AHR treatment was supported by all subgroups studied. Public opinion concerning specific types of AHR treatment varied, yet general support for the need for national AHR legislation was reported by 63% of this national sample. Contemporary views on AHR remain largely consistent with the Commission for Assisted Human Reproduction recommendations from 2005, although further research is needed to clarify exactly how popular opinion on these issues has changed. It appears that legislation allowing for the full range of donation options (and not mandating disclosure of donor identity at a stipulated age) would better align with current Irish public opinion.
