Skip navigation
Logo
User training | Reference and search service

Library catalog

Retrievo
EDS
b-on
More
resources
Content aggregators
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

acessibilidade

http://hdl.handle.net/10071/20160
acessibilidade
Title: Dual consent? Donors' and recipients' views about involvement in decision-making on the use of embryos created by gamete donation in research
Authors: Baía, I.
De Freitas, C.
Samorinha, C.
Provoost, V.
Silva, S.
Keywords: Gamete donation
Embryo research
Consent forms
Stakeholder participation
Ethics
Research
Issue Date: 2019
Abstract: Background: Reasonable disagreement about the role awarded to gamete donors in decision-making on the use of embryos created by gamete donation (EGDs) for research purposes emphasises the importance of considering the implementation of participatory, adaptive, and trustworthy policies and guidelines for consent procedures. However, the perspectives of gamete donors and recipients about decision-making regarding research with EGDs are still under-researched, which precludes the development of policies and guidelines informed by evidence. This study seeks to explore the views of donors and recipients about who should take part in consent processes for the use of EGDs in research. Methods: From July 2017 to June 2018, 72 gamete donors and 175 recipients completed a self-report structured questionnaire at the Portuguese Public Bank of Gametes (response rate: 76%). Agreement with dual consent was defined as the belief that the use of EGDs in research should be consented by both donors and recipients. Results: The majority of participants (74.6% of donors and 65.7% of recipients) were willing to donate embryos for research. Almost half of the donors (48.6%) and half of the recipients (46.9%) considered that a dual consent procedure is desirable. This view was more frequent among employed recipients (49.7%) than among non-employed (21.4%). Donors were less likely to believe that only recipients should be involved in giving consent for the use of EGDs in research (25.0% vs. 41.7% among recipients) and were more frequently favourable to the idea of exclusive donors' consent (26.4% vs. 11.4% among recipients). Conclusions: Divergent views on dual consent among donors and recipients indicate the need to develop evidence-based and ethically sustainable policies and guidelines to protect well-being, autonomy and reproductive rights of both stakeholder groups. More empirical research and further theoretical normative analyses are needed to inform people-centred policy and guidelines for shared decision-making concerning the use of EGDs for research.
Peer reviewed: yes
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10071/20160
DOI: 10.1186/s12910-019-0430-6
ISSN: 1472-6939
Ciência-IUL: https://ciencia.iscte-iul.pt/id/ci-pub-64165
Accession number: WOS:000500776200001
Appears in Collections:CIES-RI - Artigos em revista científica internacional com arbitragem científica

Files in This Item:
acessibilidade
File Description SizeFormat 
BMC Medical Ethics_2019.pdfVersão Editora297.32 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


FacebookTwitterDeliciousLinkedInDiggGoogle BookmarksMySpace
Formato BibTex MendeleyEndnote Currículo DeGóis 

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.