Abstract
Surveys of the German public have revealed a high acceptance of social freezing, i.e. oocyte conservation without medical indication. Up to now, there are no investigations available on the experiences and attitudes of health professionals towards social freezing. Between August 2015 and January 2016, we surveyed gynecologists Germany-wide on the topic social freezing. Five gynecologists specialized in reproductive medicine and five office-based gynecologists in standard care were chosen for the survey. The survey was conducted with an explorative, qualitative research design. The demand for social freezing in Germany is low. With regard to their fertility age, most women attend consultations too late, they have only little previous knowledge and false expectations. The gynecologists consider it the duty of society and politics to provide for the compatibility of family and work. They relate late parenthood to disadvantages primarily for the children. A majority of the gynecologists interviewed tend to advise natural reproduction. Social freezing is often mistaken as a kind of fertility insurance. Thus, it is necessary that physicians inform women early about the possibilities and limitations of social freezing. In the first place, social freezing is not a medical or medical-ethical topic. Women consider the method as a possibility to ensure the compatibility of family and work. This compatibility should be mostly perceived as a political topic. It cannot be a medical task to solve this issue. In fact, a debate in society as a whole is necessary that includes all relevant actors.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baldwin, K., Culley, L., Hudson, N., Mitchell, H., & Lavery, S. (2015). Oocyte cryopreservation for social reasons: Demographic profile and disposal intentions of UK users. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 31(1), 239–245.
Baumann, A., Salloch, S., Schildmann, J., & Vollmann, J. (2011). Empirische Methoden in der Medizinethik. In J. Vollmann & J. Schildmann (Eds.), Empirische Medizinethik—Konzepte, Methoden und Ergebnisse (pp. 25–44). Berlin: Lit.
Bernstein, S., & Wiesemann, C. (2014). Should Postponing Motherhood via “Social Freezing” Be Legally Banned? An Ethical Analysis. Laws, 3, 282–300.
Brezina, P. R., Kutteh, W. H., Bailey, A. P., Ding, J., Ke, R. W., & Klosky, J. L. (2015). Fertility preservation in the age of assisted reproductive technologies. Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinics of North America, 42(1), 39–54.
Chang, C. C., Elliott, T. A., Wright, G., Shapiro, D. B., Toledo, A. A., & Nagy, Z. P. (2013). Prospective Controlled study to evaluate laboratory and clinical outcomes of oocyte vitrification obtained in in vitro fertilization patients aged 30 to 39 years. Fertility and Sterility, 99(7), 1891–1897.
Cobo, A., Garcia-Velasco, J. A., Domingo, J., Remohí, J., & Pellicer, A. (2013). Is vitrification of oocytes useful for fertility preservation for age-related fertility decline and in cancer patients? Fertility and Sterility, 99(6), 1485–1495.
Die Zukunft der Familie. (2016). Forsa-Studie im Auftrag der Zeitschrift ELTERN. http://www.eltern.de/public/mediabrowserplus_root_folder/PDFs/zukunft-der-familie-studie.pdf. Accessed 18 August 2016.
Donnez, J. (2013). Introduction: Fertility preservation, from cancer to benign disease to social reasons: The challenge of the present decade. Fertility and Sterility, 99(6), 1467–1468.
Interview with GPA. (2015). Leipzig.
Interview with GPB. (2015). Wiesbaden.
Interview with GPC. (2015). Berlin.
Interview with GRA. (2015). Halle (Saale).
Interview with GRB. (2015). Berlin.
Interview with GRC. (2015). Berlin.
Interview with GRD. (2015). Wiesbaden.
Lemoine, M. E., & Ravitsky, V. (2015). Sleepwalking into infertility: The need for a public health approach toward advanced maternal age. The American Journal of Bioethics, 15(11), 37–48.
Mayring, P. (2016). Einführung in die qualitative Sozialforschung. Eine Anleitung zu qualitativem Denken. Basel: Beltz.
Mesen, T. B., Mersereau, J. E., Kane, J. B., & Steiner, A. Z. (2015). Optimal timing for elective freezing. Fertility and Sterility, 103(6), 1551–1556.
Nelson, E. (2013). Law, policy and reproductive autonomy. Oxford: Hart.
Seifer, D. B., Minkoff, H., & Merhi, Z. (2015). Putting ‘Family’ back in family planning. Human Reproduction, 30(1), 16–19.
Sharp, E. E., & Ganong, L. (2011). “I’m a Loser, I’m Not Married, Let’s Just All Look at Me”: Ever-single women’s perceptions of their social environment. Journal of Family Issues, 32(7), 956–980.
Shkedi-Rafid, S., & Hashiloni-Dolev, Y. (2012). Egg freezing for non-medical uses: the lack of a relational approach to autonomy in the new Israeli policy and in academic discussion. Journal of Medical Ethics, 38(3), 154–157.
Steger, F., Joerden, J. C., & Kaniowski, A. M. (2015). Einleitung. In F. Steger, J. C. Joerden, & A. M. Kaniowski (Eds.), Ethik in der Pränatalen Medizin (pp. 7–18). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Stoop, D., Maes, E., Polyzos, N. P., Verheyen, G., Tournaye, H., & Nekkebroeck, J. (2015). Does oocyte banking for anticipated gamete exhaustion influence future relational and reproductive choices? A follow up of bankers and non-bankers. Human Reproduction, 30(2), 338–344.
Willer, M., & Rubeis, G. (2015). Social Freezing. Medizinethische Implikationen und begriffliche Typisierung. In F. Steger, J. C. Joerden, & A. M. Kaniowski (Eds.), Ethik in der Pränatalen Medizin (pp. 139–153). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors confirm that potential conflicts do not exist.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schochow, M., Rubeis, G., Büchner-Mögling, G. et al. Social Freezing in Medical Practice. Experiences and Attitudes of Gynecologists in Germany. Sci Eng Ethics 24, 1483–1492 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9970-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9970-7