JBRA Assisted Reproduction 2025;29(Suppl.2 SBRA 2025):12
Oral Presentation
29th Annual Congress of the SBRA. São Paulo/SP - Brazil, 2025
doi: 10.5935/1518-0557.20263528
O-12. What are the Perspectives of Patients, ART-related Professionals and Psychologists Toward Disclosure of Biological Origin in Oocyte and Embryo Donation within Assisted Reproduction in Brazil?
Helena Maria Loureiro Montagnini1, Ana Paula Aquino1, Thais Sanches Domingues1, Claudia Gomes1, Michele Panzan1, Kárita Ribeiro1, Talita Souza Guimarães Devecchi1, Cassia Avelar2, Luciana Campomizzi Calazans2, Cristiane Araujo Oliveira2, Ariana Carvalho2, Luciana Potiguara3, Renata Barbosa3, Dóris Spinosa Chéles1, João Pedro Junqueira Caetano2, Eduardo Leme Alves Motta1, Mauricio Barbour Chehin1, Aline Rodrigues Lorenzon1
1Huntington Medicina Reprodutiva - Eugin Group - São Paulo - Brasil
2Huntington Medicina Reprodutiva - Eugin Group - Belo Horizonte - MG - Brasil
3Huntington Medicina Reprodutiva - Eugin Group - Brasília - DF - Brasil
Objective: Oocyte donation has been used in Brazil for over two decades, but only in recent years has it received greater attention in the media and on social platforms. The confidentiality surrounding the use of donated oocytes and embryos remains a central theme in the psychological discourse of assisted reproduction. Despite ongoing discussions, most couples choose not to disclose the use of donation in their conception process, which may limit acceptance and social visibility. This study aims to investigate how Brazilian couples undergoing oocyte and embryo donation programs deal with the disclosure, particularly their intentions to inform, or not inform, their children about their biological origins. Additionally, the study aims to analyze the perspectives of reproductive medicine professionals and psychologists on disclosure practices to reflect on potential implications for family relationships.
Methods: This is a prospective, multicenter, cross-sectional study conducted between May/2023 and March/2025, based on three anonymous online surveys targeting different populations. The first two surveys were distributed to patients enrolled in oocyte and embryo donation programs and to clinic staff members across six centers in three Brazilian states. The third targeted psychologists working in reproductive medicine throughout Brazil. All responses were collected via the Survio platform. A total of 702 individuals (145 patients, 363 staff members and 194 psychologists) were invited to participate and received the survey link after signing an informed consent form. Fisher's exact test and logistic regression were used to examine associations between emotional, sociodemographic and professional factors, with p-values <0.05 considered statistically significant.
Results: A total of 104 patients, 205 staff members, and 92 psychologists completed the survey, corresponding to response rates of 71.7%, 56.5%, and 47.2%, respectively. Among patients, 32.7% intended to disclose the biological origin to the child, 22.1% did not intend to disclose, and 45.2% were uncertain. Emotional ambivalence emerged as a key factor influencing disclosure decisions. Feelings such as joy (OR=0.18; 95% CI: 0.04–0.64; p=0.013), sadness (OR=0.23; 95% CI: 0.06–0.74; p=0.018), and guilt (OR=0.24; 95% CI: 0.05–0.91; p=0.051) were associated with a decreased likelihood of disclosure. Intentions to disclose were significantly higher among those planning to inform their fathers (OR=11.2; 95% CI: 1.44–247; p=0.046), whereas informing mothers (OR=0.05; 95% CI: 0.00–0.35; p=0.010) or third parties (OR=0.15; 95% CI: 0.04–0.49; p=0.003) was associated with secrecy. Among staff members, 56.1% supported disclosure, 10.2% opposed it, and 33.7% were unsure. Support was less likely among those aged 41–50 years (OR=0.25; 95% CI: 0.10–0.59; p=0.002), single individuals (OR=0.42; 95% CI: 0.20–0.86; p=0.020), and those with ≥8 years of professional experience (OR=0.47; 95% CI: 0.23–0.92; p=0.029). Staff who maintained the same stance in cases with known donors were more likely to support disclosure (OR=3.19; 95% CI: 1.28–8.36; p=0.015). Psychologists showed the highest support for disclosure (71.7% in favor, 2.2% opposed, 26.1% undecided). Support was more common among those with a clear understanding of the ideal age for disclosure (OR=0.18; 95% CI: 0.05–0.62; p=0.008) and those actively guiding patients toward transparency (OR=9.33; 95% CI: 1.47–186; p=0.047).
Conclusion: This study highlights the complex interplay between emotional, personal, and professional factors influencing attitudes toward disclosure in oocyte and embryo donation. While psychologists usually support openness, a significant proportion of patients remain uncertain or reluctant to disclose, possibly driven by emotional ambivalence and family dynamics. Staff opinions were more divided and influenced by demographic and professional background. These findings underscore the need for tailored counseling strategies that consider emotional readiness, cultural context, and the perspectives of all stakeholders. Expanding education and dialogue around disclosure may encourage informed decisions and strengthen trust and resilience in donor-conceived families.