Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

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. 2017 Aug; 34(8):1035-1041.JA

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.

Authors+Show Affiliations

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.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.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.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.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.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.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. m-pavone@northwestern.edu.

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

28577184

Citation

Ikhena-Abel, Deborah E., 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." Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics, vol. 34, no. 8, 2017, pp. 1035-1041.
Ikhena-Abel DE, Confino R, Shah NJ, 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. 2017;34(8):1035-1041.
Ikhena-Abel, D. E., Confino, R., Shah, N. J., Lawson, A. K., Klock, S. C., Robins, J. C., & Pavone, M. E. (2017). Is employer coverage of elective egg freezing coercive?: a survey of medical students' knowledge, intentions, and attitudes towards elective egg freezing and employer coverage. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics, 34(8), 1035-1041. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-017-0956-9
Ikhena-Abel DE, 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. 2017;34(8):1035-1041. PubMed PMID: 28577184.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Is employer coverage of elective egg freezing coercive?: a survey of medical students' knowledge, intentions, and attitudes towards elective egg freezing and employer coverage. AU - Ikhena-Abel,Deborah E, AU - Confino,Rafael, AU - Shah,Nirali J, AU - Lawson,Angela K, AU - Klock,Susan C, AU - Robins,Jared C, AU - Pavone,Mary Ellen, Y1 - 2017/06/02/ PY - 2017/04/14/received PY - 2017/05/15/accepted PY - 2017/6/4/pubmed PY - 2018/2/3/medline PY - 2017/6/4/entrez KW - Elective oocyte cryopreservation KW - Employer coverage KW - Fertility preservation SP - 1035 EP - 1041 JF - Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics JO - J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. VL - 34 IS - 8 N2 - 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. SN - 1573-7330 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/28577184/Is_employer_coverage_of_elective_egg_freezing_coercive:_a_survey_of_medical_students'_knowledge_intentions_and_attitudes_towards_elective_egg_freezing_and_employer_coverage_ L2 - https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-017-0956-9 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -