Navigating parent-child disagreement about fertility preservation in minors: scoping review and ethical considerations

被引:12
作者
Bayefsky, Michelle [1 ]
Vieira, Dorice [2 ]
Caplan, Arthur [3 ]
Quinn, Gwendolyn [1 ,3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] NYU Langone Hlth, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, 462 First Ave,Ninth Floor, New York, NY 10016 USA
[2] NYU Hlth Sci Lib, New York, NY USA
[3] NYU Grossman Sch Med, Div Med Eth, New York, NY USA
[4] NYU Grossman Sch Med, Dept Populat Hlth, New York, NY USA
关键词
fertility preservation; disagreement; scoping review; minor; adolescent; decision-making; transgender; CANCER-DIAGNOSIS; SPERM BANKING; ADOLESCENT; CRYOPRESERVATION; ONCOFERTILITY; EXPERIENCES; CHALLENGES; BARRIERS; DILEMMAS; DECISION;
D O I
10.1093/humupd/dmac019
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND Offering fertility preservation (FP) prior to gonadotoxic therapy, including cancer care and gender-affirming treatment, is now considered standard of care. Periodically, parents and children disagree about whether to pursue FP. However, it is unknown how often this occurs and how disagreement is handled when it arises. Moreover, there is no clear guidance on how to resolve these difficult situations. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE The purpose of this scoping review is to provide an overview of available research evidence about parent-child disagreement regarding FP in order to establish that disagreement occurs in practice, understand the basis for disagreement and explore suggestions for how such disputes could be resolved. Based on our findings, we offer a discussion of the ethical principles at stake when disagreement occurs, which can be used to guide clinicians' approaches when these challenging scenarios present. SEARCH METHODS A comprehensive literature search was run in several databases, including PubMed/Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library. The search was performed in February 2021 and updated in August 2021. Articles were included in the final review if they discussed how parents or children wanted their views on FP taken into account, presented evidence that parent-child discordance regarding FP exists, discussed how to handle disagreement in a particular case or offered general suggestions for how to approach parent-child discordance about FP. Studies were excluded if the patients were adult only (age 18 years and older), pertained to fertility-sparing treatments (e.g. gonad shielding, gonadopexy) rather than fertility-preserving treatments (e.g. testicular tissue cryopreservation, ovarian tissue cryopreservation, oocyte cryopreservation or sperm cryopreservation) or explored the views of clinicians but not patients or parents. Meta-synthesis was used to synthesize and interpret data across included studies and thematic analysis was used to identify common patterns and themes. OUTCOMES In total, 755 publications were screened, 118 studies underwent full-text review and 35 studies were included in the final review. Of these studies, 7 discussed how parents or children wanted their opinions to be incorporated, 11 presented evidence that discordance exists between parents and children regarding FP, 4 discussed how disagreement was handled in a particular case and 21 offered general suggestions for how to approach parent-child disagreement. There was a range of study designs, including quantitative and qualitative studies, case studies, ethical analyses and commentaries. From the thematic analysis, four general themes regarding FP disagreement emerged, and four themes relating to the ethical principles at stake in parent-child disagreement were identified. The general themes were: adolescents typically desire to participate in FP decision-making; some parents prefer not to involve their children; minors may feel more favorably about FP than their parents; and transgender minors and their parents may have unique reasons for disagreement. The ethical principles that were identified were: minor's best interest; right to an open future; minor's autonomy; and parental autonomy. WIDER IMPLICATIONS This study offers an overview of available research on the topic of parent-child disagreement regarding FP and discusses the ethical considerations at stake when disagreement occurs. The findings can be used to inform guidance for clinicians presented with FP disagreement in practice.
引用
收藏
页码:747 / 762
页数:16
相关论文
共 61 条
[1]   Impact of legislation and public funding on oncofertility: a survey of Canadian, French and Moroccan pediatric hematologists/oncologists [J].
Affdal, Aliya Oulaya ;
Grynberg, Michael ;
Hessissen, Laila ;
Ravitsky, Vardit .
BMC MEDICAL ETHICS, 2020, 21 (01)
[2]  
American Society for Reproductive Medicine, 2020, FERTIL STERIL
[3]   Gaining consent to freeze spermatozoa from adolescents with cancer: legal, ethical and practical aspects [J].
Bahadur, G ;
Whelan, J ;
Ralph, D ;
Hindmarsh, P .
HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2001, 16 (01) :188-193
[4]   Fertility preservation for transgender adolescents and young adults: a systematic review [J].
Baram, Shira ;
Myers, Samantha A. ;
Yee, Samantha ;
Librach, Clifford L. .
HUMAN REPRODUCTION UPDATE, 2019, 25 (06) :694-716
[5]   Oncofertility Decision Making: Findings from Israeli Adolescents and Parents [J].
Barlevy, Dorit ;
Wangmo, Tenzin ;
Ash, Shifra ;
Elger, Bernice S. ;
Ravitsky, Vardit .
JOURNAL OF ADOLESCENT AND YOUNG ADULT ONCOLOGY, 2019, 8 (01) :74-83
[6]   Fertility preservation and cancer: challenges for adolescent and young adult patients [J].
Benedict, Catherine ;
Thom, Bridgette ;
Kelvin, Joanne F. .
CURRENT OPINION IN SUPPORTIVE AND PALLIATIVE CARE, 2016, 10 (01) :87-94
[7]  
Campo-Engelstein Lisa, 2019, J Clin Ethics, V30, P143
[8]  
Chen Diane, 2018, Clin Pract Pediatr Psychol, V6, P93, DOI 10.1037/cpp0000230
[9]   Male and female experiences of having fertility matters raised alongside a cancer diagnosis during the teenage and young adult years [J].
Crawshaw, M. A. ;
Glaser, A. W. ;
Hale, J. P. ;
Sloper, P. .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER CARE, 2009, 18 (04) :381-390
[10]   Fertility preservation and reproduction in patients facing gonadotoxic therapies: an Ethics Committee opinion [J].
Daar, Judith ;
Benward, Jean ;
Collins, Lee ;
Davis, Joseph ;
Francis, Leslie ;
Gates, Elena ;
Ginsburg, Elizabeth ;
Gitlin, Susan ;
Klipstein, Sigal ;
Koenig, Barbara ;
La Barbera, Andrew ;
McCullough, Laurence ;
Paulson, Richard ;
Reindollar, Richard ;
Ryan, Ginny ;
Sauer, Mark ;
Sokol, Rebecca ;
Tipton, Sean ;
Westphal, Lynn ;
Zweifel, Julianne .
FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2018, 110 (03) :380-386