Egg Donation Brokers: An Analysis of Agency Versus in Vitro Fertilization Clinic Websites

Objective: To compare websites of agencies that broker the services of women who provide human eggs for in vitro fertilization versus clinics that recruit egg providers. Study design: We examined 207 websites, of which 128 were egg provider agency 40%) or clinic (60%) websites that recruited providers online. We compared them regarding several variables related to adherence to American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) guidelines. Results: According to their respective websites, agencies were more likely than clinics to mention ASRM guidelines, be located in the West/Pacific, indicate compensation, offer a fee range, set their minimum > $5,000, specify preferable traits, cap provider age at 31, require an education minimum, allow both parties to meet, discuss short-term risks, and not acknowledge a possible cancer risk. Only 25.5% of agencies and 19.5% of clinics mention psychological/emotional risks, and 11.8% and 5.2%, respectively, mention risk to future fertility. Conclusion: This research, the first to systematically compare several key aspects of egg provider agencies versus clinics, suggests it significant differences in adherence to guidelines, raising several concerns and suggesting needs for consideration of improved monitoring and regulation by ASRM or others

Recruiting egg donors online: an analysis of in vitro fertilization clinic and agency websites' adherence to American Society for Reproductive Medicine guidelines

Objective: To examine compliance with ethical guidelines of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) regarding trait-based payment variation, presentation of risks, and minimum recruitment age. Design: In June 2010, we systematically examined 207 websites, of which 102 were egg donor agency or IVF clinic websites that both recruited online and displayed compensation amounts. Setting: The Internet. Patient(s): None. Intervention(s): Not applicable. Main Outcome Measure(s): Mention of increased payment for particular donor traits, recruitment age less than 21 years, noting risks to donors. Result(s): Of the 102 sites, considerable numbers were noncompliant with ASRM's guidelines that prohibit varying compensation based on a donor's traits (34%), and recommend an age of 21 years or older (41%), and presentation of risks alongside compensation (56%). Trait-based payment variation was associated with being an agency rather than a clinic, location in the West, not being endorsed by ASRM or Society of Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART), and referring to ASRM's guidelines about compensation. Of sites mentioning traits, prior donation success was the most commonly paid for trait (64%). Conclusion(s): Our data, the first to systematically analyze agency and clinic websites reveal that many do not follow ASRM's guidelines. These data have critical implications for policy, practice, and research, suggesting needs for consideration of possible changes in guidelines, and/or improvements in compliance and monitoring by ASRM or others

How Agencies Market Egg Donation on the Internet: A Qualitative Study

Oocyte donation has been used to treat human infertility for nearly 30 years, and remains particularly popular in helping women of advanced reproductive age,1 yet it also poses ethical concerns. Due to increasing demand and undersupply of available oocyte (or egg) donors, a niche business has developed in which “agencies” assist physician practices in advertising, recruiting, screening and even “matching” donors to recipients in need of such services. The advent of the Internet has increased the number and visibility of these services, creating a market in which programs bid for women perceived as having desired traits and superior pedigrees. A few questionable ethical aspects of these agencies have been examined by ourselves and others,2 including patterns of monetary compensation that directly conflict with the American Society for Reproductive Medicine’s (ASRM) ethical guidelines,3 but many questions remain unexamined