Attitudes toward egg donation in Belgium

Personal interest and attitudes towards oocyte donation practice: a cross-sectional survey among Dutch-speaking young women in Belgium. (Li Piani, 2025)

Li Piani, L., Schoonjans, B., De Vos, M., Tournaye, H., & Blockeel, C. (2025). Personal interest and attitudes towards oocyte donation practice: a cross-sectional survey among Dutch-speaking young women in Belgium. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics, 42, 441-449. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-024-03381-6

Geographic Region: Belgium

Research Question: What are the knowledge levels, personal attitudes, and motivations regarding oocyte donation among young Dutch-speaking women in Belgium, and what factors could enhance future egg donation programs?

Design: A quantitative, epidemiological, cross-sectional web-based survey conducted from February 2023 to April 2023. The researchers distributed a 30-question private questionnaire via social media networks. The survey was designed using neutral, middle-school reading level language to avoid medical jargon.

Sample: 390 Dutch-speaking women aged 21-30 living in Belgium, with a 10% dropout rate (352 completed the entire questionnaire). The sample characteristics were: mean age 25 years, 78% Caucasian, 59% non-religious, 89% heterosexual, and 76% had partners. Education levels were high, with 46% having bachelor's degrees and 39% having university degrees. Most participants (85%) had no children.

Key Findings

Note: The paper refers to anonymous donation as “private donation”. Belgium only permits anonymous donation and directed (known) donation.

• While participants demonstrated good technical knowledge about the donation procedure, knowledge levels did not influence willingness to donate.

• Altruism was the dominant motivation for donation (87% of participants), while financial compensation was not a significant factor. 46% of respondents were unaware of reimbursement options and still considered it irrelevant to their decision-making.

• Women were more comfortable with directed (known) donation than anonymous donation. When asked if they would participate in a program as an anonymous donor, 19% said yes and 42% said no. When asked if they would participate as a directed (known donor), 41% said yes and 26% said no. About 10% of women would not participate in egg donation under any circumstances. None of the personal characteristics (income, education, parity, age, relationship) was found to be relevant.

• The survey included two questions about future contact: 1) “Would you mind being contacted by the recipient couple?” and 2) “What if the child born from your donation contacted you?” 13% of the participants were ok with being contacted by parents, and 14% were not ok with it. 9% were ok with being contacted by offspring, and 32% were not ok with it. Younger women were less concerned than older women about losing anonymity. Women without children were more concerned than women who already had children about losing anonymity.

• 69% expressed a strong need for psychological support if undergoing donation.

Limitations: The study used convenience sampling through social media, limiting generalizability to the broader population. The study didn't explicitly ask "Would you donate if your identity could be revealed to children at age 18?" (which is the standard open-identity donation question). Instead, they approached it indirectly through questions about potential future contact.

Applications: Recognizing that donor shortages are driven by hesitation and uncertainty rather than outright refusal suggests that education and support programs could improve availability. The research shows that psychological support is highly valued and should be explicitly provided in donation programs. Education programs should focus on addressing concerns and uncertainties rather than just providing technical information, since knowledge alone doesn't increase willingness to donate.

Funding Source: Not explicitly stated in the article.

Lead Author: Letizia Li Piani is a researcher at the Department of Clinical Sciences and Community Health at the University of Milan and the Infertility Unit at Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico in Milan, Italy, as well as Brussels IVF Centre for Reproductive Medicine. No disclosure of a personal connection to donor conception provided.

Regulatory Context

• Governed by "Law on Medically Assisted Reproduction and the Destination of Surplus Embryos and Gametes"..

• Belgium offers IVF to heterosexual couples, single women, and same-sex couples.

• Belgium allows only anonymous and directed (known) oocyte donation.

• Since January 1, 2024, Belgium has had a national database where donors and recipients must be registered, and once a donor has enabled six families to have a child, they will be blocked from donating.

• Donation for commercial reasons is strictly forbidden.

Related Posts

• No demographics predict open-identity donation preferences (Alland, 2024)

• Three-quarters of Spanish egg donors would be willing to meet donor-conceived children under certain conditions (Jociles Rubio, 2025)

• Providing implications counselling to South African anonymous oocyte donors donating to Australian recipients raising Australian DCC in an open-donor-identity context (Volks, 2024)