Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Is employer coverage of elective egg freezing coercive?: a survey of medical students’ knowledge, intentions, and attitudes towards elective egg freezing and employer coverage

  • Assisted Reproduction Technologies
  • Published:
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to understand medical students’ knowledge, intentions, and attitudes towards oocyte cryopreservation and employer coverage of such treatment.

Methods

This cross-sectional study was performed via an online cross-sectional survey distributed to 280 female medical students from March through August 2016. Demographics, attitudes towards employer coverage, and factors influencing decision-making were assessed via a self-reported multiple-choice questionnaire. The relationship between respondents’ attitudes towards employer coverage and other parameters was analyzed.

Results

A total of 99 responses were obtained out of 280 female medical students. Most respondents (71%) would consider oocyte cryopreservation (potential freezers), although 8% would not consider the procedure and 21% were unsure. Seventy-six percent of respondents felt pressure to delay childbearing. Potential freezers were more likely to be single (p = 0.001), to report feeling pressure to delay childbearing (p = 0.016), and to consider egg freezing if offered by an employer (p < 0.001). Importantly, 71% percent did not view employer coverage as coercive and 77% of respondents would not delay childbearing due to employer coverage. Factors influencing decision-making in potential freezers were absence of a suitable partner (83%), likelihood of success (95%), and health of offspring (94%), among others. Knowledge about the low chance of pregnancy per oocyte (6–10%) would influence decision-making in 42% of potential freezers.

Conclusion

Oocyte freezing is an acceptable strategy for the majority of young women surveyed. Pressure to delay childbearing was related to openness to freeze eggs. The majority of respondents did not find employer coverage for egg freezing coercive although further research is needed with larger, representative samples to ascertain the relationship between pressure to delay childbearing due to work demands and employer coverage for egg freezing.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Practice Committees of American Society for Reproductive Medicine, Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. Mature oocyte cryopreservation: a guideline. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(1):37–43. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.09.028.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Doyle JO, Richter KS, Lim J, Stillman RJ, Graham JR, Tucker MJ. Successful elective and medically indicated oocyte vitrification and warming for autologous in vitro fertilization, with predicted birth probabilities for fertility preservation according to number of cryopreserved oocytes and age at retrieval. Fertil Steril. 2016;105(2):459–66 e2. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.10.026.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Cobo A, Meseguer M, Remohi J, Pellicer A. Use of cryo-banked oocytes in an ovum donation programme: a prospective, randomized, controlled, clinical trial. Hum Reprod. 2010;25(9):2239–46. doi:10.1093/humrep/deq146.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Rienzi L, Romano S, Albricci L, Maggiulli R, Capalbo A, Baroni E, et al. Embryo development of fresh 'versus' vitrified metaphase II oocytes after ICSI: a prospective randomized sibling-oocyte study. Hum Reprod. 2010;25(1):66–73. doi:10.1093/humrep/dep346.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Parmegiani L, Cognigni GE, Bernardi S, Cuomo S, Ciampaglia W, Infante FE, et al. Efficiency of aseptic open vitrification and hermetical cryostorage of human oocytes. Reprod BioMed Online. 2011;23(4):505–12. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2011.07.003.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Dondorp W, de Wert G, Pennings G, Shenfield F, Devroey P, Tarlatzis B, et al. Oocyte cryopreservation for age-related fertility loss. Hum Reprod. 2012;27(5):1231–7. doi:10.1093/humrep/des029.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hodes-Wertz B, Druckenmiller S, Smith M, Noyes N. What do reproductive-age women who undergo oocyte cryopreservation think about the process as a means to preserve fertility? Fertil Steril. 2013;100(5):1343–9. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.07.201.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hamilton BE, Martin JA, Osterman MJ, Curtin SC, Matthews TJ. Births: final data for 2014. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2015;64(12):1–64.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Zoll M, Mertes H, Gupta J. Corporate giants provide fertility benefits: have they got it wrong? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2015;195:A1–2. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2015.10.018.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Stoop D, Cobo A, Silber S. Fertility preservation for age-related fertility decline. Lancet. 2014;384(9950):1311–9. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61261-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Bennett J. Company-paid egg freezing will be the great equalizer. Time. 2014;15:2014.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kime P. Military's new fertility benefit will let troops freeze their sperm and eggs. Military Times; 2016. Retrived from http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/benefits/health-care/2016/01/29/militarys-newfertility-benefit-let-troops-freeze-their-sperm-and-eggs/79511918/.

  13. Lampert N. New fertility for female soliders. The Atlantic 2016 February 29, 2016.

  14. Lewis EI, Missmer SA, Farland LV, Ginsburg ES. Public support in the United States for elective oocyte cryopreservation. Fertil Steril. 2016;106(5):1183–9. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.07.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Cobo A, Garcia-Velasco JA. Why all women should freeze their eggs. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2016;28(3):206–10. doi:10.1097/GCO.0000000000000269.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Mertes H. Does company-sponsored egg freezing promote or confine women's reproductive autonomy? J Assist Reprod Genet. 2015;32(8):1205–9. doi:10.1007/s10815-015-0500-8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Mertes H, Pennings G. Elective oocyte cryopreservation: who should pay? Hum Reprod. 2012;27(1):9–13. doi:10.1093/humrep/der364.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Association of American Medical Colleges. Table A-1: U.S. Medical school applications and matriculants by school, state of legal residence, and sex, 2016–2017. Rerieved from https://www.aamc.org/download/321442/data/factstablea1.pdf.

  19. Wang X, Chen C, Wang L, Chen D, Guang W, French J. Conception, early pregnancy loss, and time to clinical pregnancy: a population-based prospective study. Fertil Steril. 2003;79(3):577–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Gnoth C, Godehardt D, Godehardt E, Frank-Herrmann P, Freundl G. Time to pregnancy: results of the German prospective study and impact on the management of infertility. Hum Reprod. 2003;18(9):1959–66.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Stoop D, Nekkebroeck J, Devroey P. A survey on the intentions and attitudes towards oocyte cryopreservation for non-medical reasons among women of reproductive age. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(3):655–61. doi:10.1093/humrep/deq367.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Tietze C. Reproductive span and rate of reproduction among Hutterite women. Fertil Steril. 1957;8(1):89–97.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Menken J, Trussell J, Larsen U. Age and infertility. Science. 1986;233(4771):1389–94.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Schwartz D, Mayaux MJ. Female fecundity as a function of age: results of artificial insemination in 2193 nulliparous women with azoospermic husbands. Federation CECOS. N Engl J Med. 1982;306(7):404–6. doi:10.1056/NEJM198202183060706.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Speroff L, Fritz MA. Clinical gynecologic endocrinology and infertility. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Mesen TB, Mersereau JE, Kane JB, Steiner AZ. Optimal timing for elective egg freezing. Fertil Steril. 2015;103(6):1551–6 e1-4. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.03.002.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Willett LL, Wellons MF, Hartig JR, Roenigk L, Panda M, Dearinger AT, et al. Do women residents delay childbearing due to perceived career threats? Acad Med. 2010;85(4):640–6. doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181d2cb5b.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Tan SQ, Tan AW, Lau MS, Tan HH, Nadarajah S. Social oocyte freezing: a survey among Singaporean female medical students. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2014;40(5):1345–52. doi:10.1111/jog.12347.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Silber SJ, Kato K, Aoyama N, Yabuuchi A, Skaletsky H, Fan Y, et al. Intrinsic fertility of human oocytes. Fertil Steril. 2017;107(5):1232–7. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.03.014.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Prentice Women’s Hospital, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, 633 N. St. Clair Ave, Suite 18-027, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA

    Deborah E. Ikhena-Abel, Rafael Confino, Nirali J. Shah, Angela K. Lawson, Susan C. Klock, Jared C. Robins & Mary Ellen Pavone

Authors
  1. Deborah E. Ikhena-Abel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rafael Confino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nirali J. Shah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Angela K. Lawson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Susan C. Klock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jared C. Robins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Mary Ellen Pavone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mary Ellen Pavone.

Ethics declarations

This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at Northwestern University, and all surveys were completed anonymously.

Authors’ roles

All authors were involved in study data analysis, and interpretation, drafting, and revising the manuscript critically for important intellectual content, final approval of the manuscript to be published, and agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Funding

Funding P50 HD076188

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ikhena-Abel, D.E., Confino, R., Shah, N.J. et al. Is employer coverage of elective egg freezing coercive?: a survey of medical students’ knowledge, intentions, and attitudes towards elective egg freezing and employer coverage. J Assist Reprod Genet 34, 1035–1041 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-017-0956-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-017-0956-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation