This study explored how Chinese women with donor-assisted conception experienced loss of genetic continuity and managed donor-assisted conception–related information. Through Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis, a thematic framework on women’s beliefs, motivation, and behaviors in information management was constructed. Contrary to the Western trend toward disclosure, it was found that Chinese women strongly preferred to conceal, in order to protect their family members, the parent–child relationship, and family stability. Participants’ strong preference was also indicated in specific behaviors that ensure information concealment. The findings of this study may contribute toward the development of culturally sensitive clinical guidelines for counseling practice that supports infertile couples’ decision-making.
AjzenI (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes50(2): 179–211.
2.
ApplebyJBBlakeLFreemanT (2012) Is disclosure in the best interests of children conceived by donation? In: RichardsMPenningsGApplebyJB (eds) Reproductive Donation: Practice, Policy and Bioethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 231–249.
3.
BedfordOAHwangKK (2003) Guilt and shame in Chinese culture: A cross-cultural framework from the perspective of morality and identity. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior33(2): 127–144.
4.
BrighamKBCadierBChevreulK (2013) The diversity of regulation and public financing of IVF in Europe and its impact on utilization. Human Reproduction28(3): 666–675.
5.
BronfenbrennerU (2009) The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
6.
BurbeckRWilligC (2014) The personal experience of dysmenorrhoea: An interpretative phenomenological analysis. Journal of Health Psychology19(10): 1334–1344.
7.
ChanCWYipPFNgEY, et al. (2002) Gender selection in China: Its meanings and implications. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics19(9): 426–430.
CookRGolombokSBishA, et al. (1995) Disclosure of donor insemination: Parental attitudes. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry65(4): 549–559.
10.
Council on Human Reproductive Technology (2013) Code of Practice on Reproductive Technology and Embryo Research. Hong Kong: Council on Human Reproductive Technology. Available at: http://www.chrt.org.hk (accessed 4 July 2017).
11.
Decomposition of the word “耻” (2017) Available at: hanziyuan.net/#耻 (accessed 25 March 2018).
12.
Decomposition of the word “疚” (2017) Available at: hanziyuan.net/#疚 (accessed 25 March 2018).
13.
DerlegaVJChaikinAL (1977) Privacy and self-disclosure in social relationships. Journal of Social Issues33(3): 102–115.
14.
FlowersPDuncanBKnussenC (2003) Re-appraising HIV testing: An exploration of the psychosocial costs and benefits associated with learning one’s HIV status in a purposive sample of Scottish gay men. British Journal of Health Psychology8(2): 179–194.
15.
Garcia-RuizYGuerra-DiazD (2012) Gamete and embryo donation: A legal view from Spain. In: RichardsMPenningsGApplebyJB (eds) Reproductive Donation: Practice, Policy and Bioethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 112–129.
16.
GolombokSLycettEMacCallumF, et al. (2004) Parenting children conceived by gamete donation. Journal of Family Psychology18: 443–452.
17.
GolombokSMurrayCJadvaV, et al. (2006) Non-genetic and non-gestational parenthood: Consequences for parent–child relationships and the psychological well-being of mothers, fathers and children at age 3. Human Reproduction21(7): 1918–1924.
18.
GolombokSReadingsJBlakeL, et al. (2011) Children conceived by gamete donation: Psychological adjustment and mother-child relationships at age 7. Journal of Family Psychology25(2): 230–239.
19.
HarperJCKennettDReiselD (2016) The end of donor anonymity: How genetic testing is likely to drive anonymous gamete donation out of business. Human Reproduction31(6): 1135–1140.
20.
HoDYF (1976) On the concept of face. American Journal of Sociology81(4): 867–884.
21.
HoDYF (1994) Face dynamics: From conceptualization to measurement. In: Ting-ToomeyS (ed.) The Challenge of Facework: Cross-Cultural and Interpersonal Issues. New York: SUNY Press, pp. 269–286.
22.
HorowitzJEGalstJPElsterN (2010) Offspring born of collaborative reproductive arrangements: Issues of disclosure and third-party identification. In: HorowitzJEGalstJPElsterN (eds) Ethical Dilemmas in Fertility Counseling. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 141–168.
23.
JadvaVFreemanTKramerW, et al. (2009) The experiences of adolescents and adults conceived by sperm donation: Comparisons by age of disclosure and family type. Human Reproduction24(8): 1909–1919.
24.
KlockSCGreenfeldDA (2004) Parents’ knowledge about the donors and their attitudes toward disclosure in oocyte donation. Human Reproduction19(7): 1575–1579.
25.
LalosADanielsKGottliebC, et al. (2003) Recruitment and motivation of semen providers in Sweden. Human Reproduction18(1): 212–216.
26.
LarsonDGChastainRL (1990) Self-concealment: Conceptualization, measurement and health implications. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology9(4): 439–455.
27.
LaruelleCPlaceIDemeestrereI, et al. (2011) Anonymity and secrecy options of recipient couples and donors, and ethnic origin influence in three types of oocyte donation. Human Reproduction26(2): 382–390.
28.
LukBHKLokeAY (2015) The impact of infertility on the psychological well-being, marital relationships, sexual relationships, and quality of life of couples: A systematic review. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy41(6): 610–625.
29.
MacDougallKBeckerGScheibJE, et al. (2007) Strategies for disclosure: How parents approach telling their children that they were conceived with donor gametes. Fertility and Sterility87(3): 524–533.
30.
MahlstedtPPLaBountyKRKennedyWT (2008) The voices of adult offspring of sperm donation: forces for change within assisted reproductive technology in the United States. Fertility and sterility90: S178.
31.
McGeeGBrakmanSVGurmankinAD (2001) Gamete donation and anonymity: Disclosure to children conceived with donor gametes should not be optional. Human Reproduction16(10): 2033–2036.
32.
MarquardtEGlennNDClarkK (2010) My Daddy’s Name Is Donor: A New Study of Young Adults Conceived through Sperm Donation. New York: Institute for American Values.
33.
MorseJMBarrettMMayanM, et al. (2002) Verification strategies for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods1(2): 13–22.
34.
NgELiuAChanC, et al. (2004) Hong Kong: A social, legal and clinical overview. In: BlythELandauR (eds) Third Party Assisted Conception across Cultures: Social, Legal and Ethical Perspectives. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers, pp. 112–128.
35.
PietkiewiczISmithJA (2014) A practical guide to using interpretative phenomenological analysis in qualitative research psychology. Psychological Journal20(1): 7–14.
36.
ScheffTJ (1988) Shame and conformity: The deference-emotion system. American Sociological Review53: 395–406.
37.
SmithJA (2011) Evaluating the contribution of interpretative phenomenological analysis. Health Psychology Review5(1): 9–27.
38.
ThornPWischmannT (2009) German guidelines for psychosocial counselling in the area of gamete donation. Human Fertility12(2): 73–80.
39.
TsuiEY-L (2015) Donor-assisted conception: The living experience and the concealment tendency in Chinese recipients. PhD Dissertation, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong.
40.
TsuiEY-LChengJOY (2018) When failed motherhood threatens womanhood: Using donor-assisted conception (DAC) as the last resort. Asian Women34(2): 33–60.
41.
TurkmendagIDingwallRMurphyT (2008) The removal of donor anonymity in the UK: The silencing of claims by would-be parents. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family22(3): 283–310.
42.
TurnerAJCoyleA (2000) What does it mean to be a donor offspring? The identity experiences of adults conceived by donor insemination and the implications for counselling and therapy. Human Reproduction15(9): 2041–2051.
43.
WilliamsMJMcManusFMuseK, et al. (2011) Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for severe health anxiety (hypochondriasis): An interpretative phenomenological analysis of patients’ experiences. British Journal of Clinical Psychology50(4): 379–397.
