added a project reference
Egg freezing (EF) technology has improved significantly over the last decade, giving women more choice over their reproductive futures. Despite this advance, EF brings forth contentious ethical and regulatory issues. Policies controlling access to EF vary around the world and there is a lack of consensus about who should have access and what criteria are relevant in making these decisions. This study aimed to identify views of women about access to EF for both “medical” and “non-medical” risks to infertility. An online survey was administered to women aged between 18 and 60 years in Victoria, Australia between April and May 2018. A total of 1,066 individuals initiated the survey. The median age of the participants was 28 years and 81% were <40 years old. Almost all participants (98%) supported access to medical EF in situations where treatments (e.g. chemotherapy) or illnesses threaten fertility. Support for access to EF for non-medical indications was lower; 75% supported EF for “lack of suitable partner”, followed by “financial insecurity to raise a child” (72%) and “career/educational advancement” (65%). Older respondents (aged ≥40 years) were less likely than their younger counterparts to support all indications for non-medical EF. Our findings indicate broad support for EF. However, the variation in support between indications for non-medical EF suggests that individuals do not think about access to EF simply in terms of medical necessity. To reflect public views, future policy may need to consider access to EF beyond the medical/non-medical distinction.
Background Since 2014, many companies have followed the lead of Apple and Facebook and now offer financial support to female employees to access egg freezing. Australian companies may soon make similar offers. Employer-sponsored egg freezing (ESEF) has raised concerns and there is academic debate about whether ESEF promotes reproductive autonomy or reinforces the ‘career vs. family’ dichotomy. Despite the growing availability of ESEF and significant academic debate, little is known about how ESEF is perceived by the public. The aim of this study was to explore women’s attitudes toward ESEF. Methods Women aged 18-60 years who resided in Victoria, Australia were invited to complete an online, cross-sectional survey investigating views toward egg freezing. Associations between participant demographics and their views about ESEF were assessed using multinominal logistic regression, adjusted for age and free text comments were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results The survey was completed by 656 women, median age 28 years (range: 18-60 years). Opinions on the appropriateness of employers offering ESEF were divided (Appropriate: 278, 42%; Inappropriate: 177, 27%; Unsure: 201, 31%). There was significantly less support for ESEF among older participants and those employed part-time (p < 0.05). While some participants saw the potential for ESEF to increase women’s reproductive and career options, others were concerned that ESEF could pressure women to delay childbearing and exacerbate existing inequities in access to ARTs. Conclusions Our analysis revealed that while some women identified risks with ESEF, for many women ESEF is not viewed as theoretically wrong, but rather it may be acceptable under certain conditions; such as with protections around reproductive freedoms and assurances that ESEF is offered alongside other benefits that promote career building and family. We suggest that there may be a role for the State in ensuring that these conditions are met.
STUDY QUESTION What are the cohort trends of women undergoing oocyte cryopreservation (OC)? SUMMARY ANSWER There has been a dramatic increase in OC cycles undertaken each year since 2010, and the demographics of women accessing OC has shifted to a younger age group, but so far very few women have returned to use their cryopreserved oocytes in treatments. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Although OC, as a method of fertility preservation, is offered around the world, global data are lacking on who is accessing OC, who is returning to thaw oocytes and whether these trends are changing. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION A trinational retrospective cohort study was performed of 31 191 OC cycles and 972 oocyte thaw (OT) cycles undertaken in the USA (2010–2016) and 3673 OC and 517 OT cycles undertaken in Australia/New Zealand (Aus/NZ; 2010–2015). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Data were obtained from the USA Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART) national registry and the Australian and New Zealand Assisted Reproduction Database (ANZARD). De-identified data were requested on all autologous oocyte freeze-all cycles and all cycles where autologous oocytes were thawed to be used in a treatment cycle for the time periods of interest. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE In both the USA and Aus/NZ, there has been a dramatic rise in the number of OC cycles performed each year (+880% in the USA from 2010 to 2016 and +311% in Aus/NZ from 2010 to 2015). Across both regions, most women undergoing OC were aged in their late 30s, but the average age decreased over time (USA: 36.7 years vs 34.7 years in 2010 and 2016, respectively). The number of women returning for thaw cycles was low (USA: 413 in 2016, Aus/NZ: 141 in 2015) and most thaw cycles (47%) across both regions involved oocytes that were frozen for <6 months. In the USA, a higher proportion of cycles resulted in a live birth when only thawed oocytes were used, compared to cycles that combined thawed oocytes with fresh oocytes (25% vs 11%, respectively; P < 0.001). Age at retrieval influenced live birth rate in the USA; 38% of thaw cycles started in women who stored oocytes when aged ≤35 years resulted in a live birth, whereas only 16% resulted in a live birth for women who stored oocytes when aged ≥36 years. Similar data were unobtainable from Aus/NZ. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION There were limitations associated with both the SART and ANZARD data outputs received. The format in which the ANZARD data were provided, and the inconsistencies seen amongst cycle reporting in the SART dataset, restricted data interpretation. For example, both datasets did not provide a clear indication as to why women were undergoing OC and it was not possible to accurately calculate duration of storage for thaw cycles in the USA. We also did not obtain details on embryo quality from either database and acknowledge that embryo quality and subsequent outcome (embryo freezing or discard) would be of interest, especially when considering the efficacy of OC. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS The data show that there is widespread demand for OC, and it is increasingly undertaken by younger women; however, the limitations encountered in the dataset support the need for a shift to a more uniform approach to data collection and presentation by large databases, worldwide. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This study received funding from the Fertility Society of Australia to support the ANZARD data extraction. M.J. is supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship stipend. The authors declare no competing interests. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER N/A.