Álvarez DJA

Language: Spanish
References: 26
Page: 163-173
PDF size: 73.36 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Background: There are no empirical studies which have explored the experimentation with human embryos in Latin America. In general, there are no frameworks that regulate neither lawful matters of assisted reproduction nor the possibility of experimentation with human embryos, and the ethical frames are limited to those adopted by each center. Currently, to think about the real possibilities of experimentation with embryos goes beyond a legal frame, since the opinion of the potential actors is not known either (gamete or embryo donors). The experimentation with embryos is practically a reality in developed nations and Latin America continues appearing almost only as a potential market for the scientific advance.
Objective: To determine the anxiety types of the couples treated with assisted fertilization before hypothetical donation of embryos for investigation, by a mixed quantitative and qualitative methodology.
Patients and methods: An oral semistructured interview was made individually to ten participants (seven women and three men) who had gone like patients of the Assisted Fertilization Program of the Gynecology and Obstetrics Service of the Clinical Hospital of the University of Chile. The scale of anxiety of the analysis of the verbal conduct method of Gottschalk and collaborators was applied to them.
Results: The most frequently associated types of anxiety to the hypothetical situation of donation of embryos for scientific research were the fault, separation, and mutilation anxiety.
Conclusions: It is recommended to develop educative programs regarding the culture of embryo donation for treatment of couples with fertility problems, as well as for investigation, and to develop educative programs about the meaning of relationship and of embryo status.

REFERENCES

1. Moore KL. Embriología clínica. 4ª ed. México: Interamericana, 1989;p:6.

2. Lacadena JR. Embriones humanos y cultivos de tejidos: reflexiones científicas, éticas y jurídicas. Rev Der Gen H 2000;12:191-212.

3. McLaren A. Prelude to embryogenesis. In: The CIBA Foundation. Human embryo research: yes or no? London: The CIBA Foundation, 1986;pp:5-23.

4. Grobstein C. Biological characteristics of the preembryo. Ann NY Acad Sci 1988;541:346-8.

5. Bahadur G. The moral status of the embryo: the human embryo in the UK Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Research Purposes) Regulation 2001 debate. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 2003;17(1):12-16.

6. Tesarik J. A zygote is not an embryo: ethical and legal considerations. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 2004;19(1):13-16.

7. ESRHE Task Force on Ethics and Law. I. The moral status of the pre-implantation embryo. Hum Reprod 2001;16(5):1046-8.

8. Rudomín-Zevnovaty P. Recomendaciones para el empleo en México de células provenientes de tejidos embrionarios humanos para la investigación. Derecho y Cultura 2002;5:21-41.

9. Zegers-Hoschschild F. Attitudes toward reproduction in Latin America. Teachings from the use of modern reproductive technologies. Hum Reprod Update 1999;5(1):21-25.

10. ESHRE Task Force on Ethics and Law. III. Gamete and embryo donation. Hum Reprod 2002;17(5):1407-8.

11. Kahn JP. The questionable future of unregulated reproductive medicine. J Androl 2002;23(4):470.

12. Kahn JH. Stem cells create a market for human embryos? J Androl 2001;22(1):12.

13. Domar AD, Clapp D, Slawsby E, et al. Impact of group psychological interventions on pregnancy rates in infertile women. Fertil Steril 2000;73(4):805-811.

14. Acién P. Esterilidad de causa psicológica. Toko-Gin Pract 2002;61(1):26-33.

15. Cook R. The relationship between sex role and emotional functioning in patients undergoing assisted conception. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol 1993;14(1):31-40.

16. Gilmore DD. Hacerse hombre. Concepciones culturales de la masculinidad. Barcelona: Paidós, 1994;pp:110-11.

17. Hjelmstedt A, Andersson L, Skoog-Svanberg A, et al. Gender differences in psychological reactions to infertility among couples seeking IVF- and ICSI-treatment. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1999;78:42-48.

18. Smeenk JMJ, Verhaak CM, Eugster A, et al. The effect of anxiety and depression on the outcome of in-vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod 2001;16(7):1420-3.

19. Palacios BE, Jadresic ME, Palacios BF, Miranda VC, Domínguez R. Estudio descriptivo de los aspectos emocionales asociados a la infertilidad y su tratamiento. Rev Chil Obstet Ginecol 2002;67(1):19-24.

20. Gottschalk LA, Winget CN, Gleser GC, Lolas SF. Análisis de la conducta verbal. Un método para cuantificar atributos psicológicos. Santiago de Chile: Editorial Universitaria, 1984.

21. Sagrada Congregación para la Doctrina de la Fe. Instrucción sobre el respeto de la vida naciente y la dignidad de la procreación. Citado por Sgreccia E. Manual de Bioética. México: Diana, 1996;pp:426-7.

22. McMahon CA, Gibson FL, Leslie GI, et al. Embryo donation for medical research: attitudes and concerns of potential donors. Hum Reprod 2003;18(4):871-7.

23. Laruelle C, Englert Y. Psychological study of in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer participants’ attitudes toward the destiny of their supernumerary embryos. Fertil Steril 1995;63(5):1047-50.

24. Newton CR, McDermid A, Tekpetey F, Tummon IS. Embryo donation: attitudes toward donation procedures and factors predicting willingness to donate. Hum Reprod 2003;18(4):878-4.

25. Burton PJ, Sanders K. Patient attitudes to donation of embryos for research in Western Australia. Med J Aust 2004;180(11): 559-61.

26. Bangsboll S, Pinborg A, Yding-Andersen C, Nyboe-Andersen A. Patients’ attitudes towards donation of surplus cryopreserved embryos for treatment or research. Hum Reprod 2004;19(10):2415-9.