Student views on recognition and payment options for gamete donation in New Zealand

Abstract

BackgroundDemand for donor gametes in New Zealand significantly outweighs the number of willing donors. Payment for donation has been suggested as a viable solution to increase the supply and attract more donors in acknowledging the time, effort and inconvenience associated with donation.AimsInternationally, university students are a commonly targeted group for paid gamete donation. This study aims to explore the views of university students in New Zealand to gauge their support and concerns relating to a range of options to recognise donors, including payment.MethodsTwo hundred and three tertiary students completed a questionnaire exploring their views on various forms of recognition for donation and concerns relating to payment.ResultsParticipants indicated the greatest support for reimbursement for expenses directly related to the donation process. Payment constituting explicit financial advantage was regarded least favourably. Participants held concerns that payment would attract people donating for the ‘wrong’ reasons and lead to donors concealing relevant histories. Further concerns included payment increasing costs for recipients and causing disparities in access to gametes.ConclusionsThe findings of this study suggest that within a New Zealand context a culture of gift‐giving and altruism are strongly held principles towards reproductive donation, including among the student population. This highlights the need to consider alternative strategies to commercial models to overcome donor shortages which are in line with the cultural and legislative context of New Zealand.

A systematic review of assisted and third-party reproduction guidelines regarding management and care of donors

“…Those in favor of compensation with no fixated amount argue that it is a necessary step to ensure adequate supply for the growing demand of gamete donation [51,54,82,83]. However, those against the payment (or compensation without limit), believe that payment in exchange for one's gamete is a form of objectifying and commodifying humans, and increasing the cost of treatment causes inequality in access to treatment, so that is morally inappropriate [51,82,84,85].…”