Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Ten pathways to elective egg freezing: a binational analysis

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

Abstract

Purpose

What are the specific pathways that lead women to freeze their eggs? In this binational study, women were asked directly about the life circumstances that led them on the path to elective egg freezing (EEF).

Methods

From June 2014 to August 2016, 150 women (114 in the USA, 36 in Israel) who had completed at least 1 cycle of EEF were interviewed by two medical anthropologists. Study participants were recruited through four American IVF clinics (two academic, two private) and three in Israel (one academic, two private). Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and entered into a qualitative data management program (Dedoose) for analysis.

Results

The majority (85%) of women in the study were without partners, while 15% had partners at the time of EEF. Six pathways to EEF were found among women without partners (being single, divorced, broken up, deployed overseas, single mother, career planner), with career planning being the least common pathway to EEF. Among women with partners, four pathways to EEF were found (relationship too new or uncertain, partner not ready to have children, partner refusing to have children, or partner having multiple partners). With only one exception, the pathways and their frequencies were similar in both countries.

Conclusions

Partnership problems, not career planning, lead most women on pathways to EEF. These pathways should be studied in a variety of national settings, and fertility clinics should offer patient-centered care for single women pursuing EEF in the couples-oriented world of IVF.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Schon SB, Shapiro M, Gracia C, Senapati S. Medical and elective fertility preservation: impact of removal of the experimental label from oocyte cryopreservation. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2017;34:1207–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Potdar N, Gelbaya TA, Nardo A. Oocyte vitrification in the 21st century and post-warming fertility outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Reprod BioMed Online. 2014;29:159–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Baldwin K, Culley L, Hudson N, Mitchell H. Reproductive technology and the life course: current debates and research in social egg freezing. Hum Fertil. 2014;17:170–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Zegers-Hochschild F, Adamson GD, Dyer S, Racowsky C, de Mouzon J, Sokol R, et al. The international glossary of infertility and fertility care, 2017. Hum Reprod. 2017;32:1786–801.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Argyle CE, Harper JC, Davies MC. Oocyte cryopreservation: where are we now? Hum Reprod Update. 2016;22:440–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Cobo A, Garcia-Velasco JA. Why all women should freeze their eggs. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2016;28:206–10.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Donnez J, Dolmans M-M. Fertility preservation in women. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:1657–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Goldman KN, Grifo JA. Elective oocyte cryopreservation for deferred childbearing. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2016;23:458–64.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gunnala V, Schattman G. Oocyte vitrification for elective fertility preservation: the past, present, and future. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2017;29:59–63.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Mertes H. The portrayal of healthy women requesting oocyte cryopreservation. Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2013;5:141–6.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. 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. 2014;100:1343–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Stoop D, Maes E, Polyzos NP, Verheyen G, Tournaye H, Nekkebroeck J. Does oocyte banking for anticipated gamete exhaustion influence future relational and reproductive choices? A follow-up of bankers and non-bankers. Hum Reprod. 2015;30:338–44.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Hammarberg K, Kirkman M, Pritchard N, Hickey M, Peate M, McBain J, et al. Reproductive experiences of women who cryopreserved oocytes for non-medical reasons. Hum Reprod. 2017;32:575–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Pritchard N, Kirkman M, Hammarberg K, McBain J, Agresta F, Bayly C, et al. Characteristics and circumstances of women in Australia who cryopreserved their oocytes for non-medical indications. J Reprod Infant Psychol. 2017;35:108–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Greenwood EA, Pasch LA, Hastie J, Cedars MI, Huddleston HG. To freeze or not to freeze: decision regret and satisfaction following elective oocyte cryopreservation. Fertil Stertil. 2018;109:1097–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Baldwin K, Culley L, Hudson N, Mitchell H, Lavery S. Oocyte cryopreservation for social reasons: demographic profile and disposal intentions of UK users. Reprod BioMed Online. 2015;31:239–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Baldwin K. “I suppose I think to myself, that’s the best way to be a mother”: how ideologies of parenthood shape women’s use for social egg freezing technology. Sociol Res Online. 2017;22:2–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Baldwin K. Conceptualising women’s motivations for social egg freezing and experience of reproductive delay. Sociol Health Illn. 2018;40:859–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Baldwin K, Culley LA, Hudson N, Mitchell HL. Running out of time: exploring women’s motivations for social egg freezing. J Psychosom Obstet Gynecol. 2018; https://doi.org/10.1080/0167482X.2018.1460352.

  20. Birenbaum-Carmeli D. Thirty-five years of assisted reproductive technologies in Israel. Reprod Biomed Soc Online. 2016;2:16–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hollan D. The psychology of person-centered ethnography. In: Moore CC, Mathews HF, editors. The psychology of cultural experience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2001. p. 48–67.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Bock JD. Doing the right thing? Single motherhood by choice and the struggle for legitimacy. Gend Soc. 2000;14:62–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Potter AE, Knaub PC. Single motherhood by choice: a parenting alternative. J Fam Econ Iss. 1988;9:240–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Singerman D. The negotiation of waithood: the political economy of delayed marriage in Egypt. In: Khalaf S, Khalaf R, editors. Arab youth: social mobilisation in times of risk. London: Saqi; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Wentzell EA, Inhorn MC. Reconceiving masculinity and “men as partners” for ICPD beyond 2014: insights from a Mexican HPV study. Glob Public Health. 2014;9:651–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Kirkby R. Why are more young women than ever freezing their eggs? Stylist, April 21, 2018. https://www.stylist.co.uk/long-reads/fertility-clinic-london-uk-test.../202508.

  27. Inhorn MC, Birenbaum-Carmeli D, Birger J, Westphal LM, Doyle J, Gleicher N, et al. Elective egg freezing and its underlying socio-demography: a binationalanalysis with global implications. Reprod Biol Endocrin. 2018;16. https://rbej.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12958-018-0389-z.

  28. Birger J. Date-onomics: how dating became a lopsided numbers game. New York: Workman Publishing; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Notkin M. Otherhood: modern women finding a new kind of happiness. Berkeley: Seal Press; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Jennifer DeChello, Jeannine Estrada, Rose Keimig, Sandee Murray, Tasha Newsome, Mira Vale, and Ruoxi Yu for various forms of editorial, study recruitment, and transcription assistance.

Funding

This study was funded by the US National Science Foundation, BCS-1356136.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anthropology, Yale University, 10 Sachem Street, New Haven, CT, 06511, USA

    Marcia C. Inhorn

  2. Department of Nursing, University of Haifa, 3498838, Haifa, Israel

    Daphna Birenbaum-Carmeli

  3. Stanford Fertility and Reproductive Medicine Center, Stanford University Medical Center, 1195 W. Fremont Ave., Sunnyvale, CA, 94087, USA

    Lynn M. Westphal

  4. Shady Grove Fertility, 9601 Blackwell Road, Rockville, MD, 20850, USA

    Joseph Doyle

  5. Center for Human Reproduction, 21 E. 69th Street, New York, NY, 10021, USA

    Norbert Gleicher

  6. Clinical Center for Fertility Preservation and Fertility Preservation Research Laboratory, Sheba Medical Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, IVF and Fertility Unit, 1 Emek Ha’ella St., 52621, Ramat Gan, Israel

    Dror Meirow

  7. Israeli Fertility Society, Division Reproductive Endocrinology-IVF, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Carmel Medical Center, Ruth & Bruce Faculty of Medicine, Technion, 343621, Haifa, Israel

    Martha Dirnfeld

  8. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sheba Medical Center, IVF and Fertility Unit, 1 Emek Ha’ella St., 52621, Ramat Gan, Israel

    Daniel Seidman

  9. Assuta Medical Center, 13 Eliezer Mazal, 75653, Rishon LeZion, Israel

    Arik Kahane

  10. Yale Fertility Center and Fertility Preservation Program, 150 Sargent Drive, New Haven, CT, 06511, USA

    Pasquale Patrizio

Authors
  1. Marcia C. Inhorn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daphna Birenbaum-Carmeli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lynn M. Westphal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Joseph Doyle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Norbert Gleicher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Dror Meirow
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Martha Dirnfeld
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Daniel Seidman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Arik Kahane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Pasquale Patrizio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marcia C. Inhorn.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committees and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Inhorn, M.C., Birenbaum-Carmeli, D., Westphal, L.M. et al. Ten pathways to elective egg freezing: a binational analysis. J Assist Reprod Genet 35, 2003–2011 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-018-1277-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-018-1277-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation