title: How couples who have undergone in vitro fertilization decide what to do with surplus frozen embryos.
abstract: In a qualitative interview study of 77 families with stored frozen embryos, we found that while embryo disposition decision making was influenced by individual life circumstances, embryo quantity/quality, personal values, embryo conceptualization, and clinic information, it was a stepwise process that could be represented as three sequential questions: (1) Will the embryos be used for additional attempts at conception? If not, (2) Will the embryos remain in storage? And if not, (3) Will the embryos be donated to other people or to science, or will they be destroyed? While almost two-thirds (63%) of participants kept their embryos in storage after 5 years, either passively through disagreement or indecision or actively to maintain embryo potential, avert feelings of loss, or as psychological or genetic "insurance," IVF clinic support and detailed information about options motivated families to make disposition decisions.
authors.affiliation: Institute for Health and Aging, University of California, San Francisco, California 94118, USA. Robert.Nachtigall@ucsf.edu
authors.forename: Robert D
authors.initials: RD
authors.lastname: Nachtigall
authors.forename: Kirstin
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Mac Dougall
authors.forename: Jennifer
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Harrington
authors.forename: Julia
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Duff
authors.forename: Matthew
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Lee
authors.forename: Gay
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Becker
mesh_terms: D002755:Choice Behavior; D015925:Cryopreservation; D003657:Decision Making; D019924:Embryo Disposition / Q000523:psychology*; D033041:Embryo Research; D005260:Female; D005307:Fertilization in Vitro / Q000523:psychology*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D010290:Parents / Q000523:psychology*
references.citation: Hum Reprod. 2007 Dec;22(12):3129-38
references.pmid: 18025028
references.citation: Fertil Steril. 2006 Jul;86(1):86-91
references.pmid: 16716313
references.citation: Hum Reprod. 2005 Jun;20(6):1661-9
references.pmid: 15760957
references.citation: Hum Reprod. 2004 Oct;19(10):2415-9
references.pmid: 15310730
references.citation: Hum Reprod. 2007 Jun;22(6):1751-8
references.pmid: 17416918
references.citation: Fertil Steril. 2010 Feb;93(2):499-509
references.pmid: 19061998
references.citation: Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2007 Feb;21(1):101-12
references.pmid: 17045530
references.citation: Soc Sci Med. 2006 May;62(10):2349-59
references.pmid: 16289740
references.citation: Fertil Steril. 1999 Apr;71(4):604-8
references.pmid: 10202866
references.citation: Fertil Steril. 2000 Feb;73(2):215-20
references.pmid: 10685518
references.citation: Fertil Steril. 1995 May;63(5):1047-50
references.pmid: 7720916
references.citation: Hum Reprod. 2003 Apr;18(4):871-7
references.pmid: 12660288
references.citation: Fertil Steril. 2005 Aug;84(2):431-4
references.pmid: 16084886
references.citation: Hum Reprod. 1999 Sep;14(9):2343-4
references.pmid: 10469707
references.citation: Science. 2007 Jul 6;317(5834):46-7
references.pmid: 17588897
references.citation: Fertil Steril. 2006 Jun;85(6):1623-30
references.pmid: 16678178
references.citation: Hum Reprod. 2006 May;21(5):1325-7
references.pmid: 16410332
references.citation: Hum Reprod. 2003 Apr;18(4):878-84
references.pmid: 12660289
references.citation: Med J Aust. 2004 Jun 7;180(11):559-61
references.pmid: 15174985
references.citation: Fertil Steril. 2009 Jan;91(1):140-7
references.pmid: 18053994