Genetic evaluation procedures at sperm banks in the United States

Assisted Reproductive Technology and Infertility Special Interest Group, National Society of Genetic Counselors, Chicago, Illinois. Electronic address: .
Fertility and sterility (Impact Factor: 4.59). 02/2013; 99(6). DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.01.093
Source: PubMed


OBJECTIVE: To assess how genetic evaluations of sperm donor applicants are performed in the United States. DESIGN: A questionnaire was designed to assess: 1) the professionals involved in the family history evaluation and genetic screening; 2) the genetic testing, counseling, and informed consent processes; and 3) how the results of genetic evaluations and new risk information is communicated to donors. SETTING: Semen donor facilities. PARTICIPANT(S): Representatives of semen donor facilities. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Descriptive data. RESULT(S): Thirteen responses were received. All of the facilities assessed donors' family histories; eight of the facilities (62%) routinely informed donors about the results of these evaluations. At the majority of facilities (10/13), informed consent for genetic testing is obtained as part of the overall contract to be a sperm donor. Genetic counselors are employed full-time at two facilities and part-time at five others. CONCLUSION(S): There is variability in the education and informed consent processes for semen donor applicants, including variable communication about the limitations of genetic tests and the potential implications for the donors' own children. Further research into the best practices for education and consent for sperm donor applicants may be beneficial to ensure the well-being of the donors and their future offspring.

12 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The regulation of assisted reproductive technologies is a contested area. Some jurisdictions, such as the UK and a number of Australian states, have comprehensive regulation of most aspects of assisted reproductive technologies; others, such as the USA, have taken a more piecemeal approach and rely on professional guidelines and the general regulation of medical practice to govern this area. It will be argued that such a laissez-faire approach is inadequate for regulating the complex area of assisted reproductive technologies. Two key examples from practice, reducing multiple births and registers of donors and offspring, will be considered to illustrate the effects of the regulatory structure of assisted reproductive technologies in the USA on practice. It will be concluded that the regulatory structure in the USA fails to provide an adequate mechanism for ensuring the ethical and safe conduct of ART services, and that more comprehensive regulation is required. link to full text
    Reproductive biomedicine online 10/2014; 29(4):516-522. DOI:10.1016/j.rbmo.2014.06.018 · 3.02 Impact Factor