Financial compensation of oocyte donors: an Ethics Committee opinion

      Financial compensation of women donating oocytes for infertility therapy or for research is justified on ethical grounds and should acknowledge the time, inconvenience, and discomfort associated with screening, ovarian stimulation, and oocyte retrieval, and not vary according to the planned use of the oocytes, the number or quality of oocytes retrieved, the number or outcome of prior donation cycles, or the donor's ethnic or other personal characteristics. This document replaces the document of the same name, last published in 2007 (Fertil Steril 2007;88:305-9).
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment


      Subscribe to Fertility and Sterility
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Mechanick Braverman A.
        Survey results on the current practice of ovum donation. Ovum Donor Task Force of the Psychological Special Interests Group of the American Fertility Society.
        Fertil Steril. 1993; 59: 1216-1220
      1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Archived ART Reports and Spreadsheets 2004. Available at Last accessed October 6, 2016.

        • Peskin B.D.
        • Austin C.
        • Lisbona H.
        • Goldfarb J.
        Cost analysis of shared oocyte in vitro fertilization.
        Obstet Gynecol. 1996; 88: 428-430
        • Ahuja K.K.
        • Simons E.G.
        • Mostyn B.J.
        • Bowen-Simpkins P.
        An assessment of the motives and morals of egg share donors: policy of “payments” to donors requires a fair review.
        Hum Reprod. 1998; 13: 2671-2678
        • Healy D.L.
        Ovarian cancer, infertility and infertility therapy.
        in: Kempers R.D. Cohen J. Haney A.F. Younger J.B. Fertility and reproductive medicine. Elsevier Science, New York1998: 1-14
        • National Advisory Board on Ethics in Reproduction
        Report and recommendations on oocyte donation.
        in: Cohen C.B. New ways of making babies: the case of egg donation. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN1996: 233-247
        • Ahuja K.K.
        • Mostyn B.J.
        • Simons E.G.
        Egg sharing and egg donation: attitudes of British egg donors and recipients.
        Hum Reprod. 1997; 12: 2845-2852
        • Klock S.C.
        • Stout J.E.
        • Davidson M.
        Psychological characteristics and factors related to willingness to donate again among anonymous oocyte donors.
        Fertil Steril. 2003; 79: 1312-1316
        • Svanberg A.S.
        • Lampic C.
        • Bergh T.
        • Lundkvist O.
        Characterization of potential oocyte donors in Sweden.
        Hum Reprod. 2003; 18: 2205-2215
        • National Academy of Sciences
        Guidelines for human embryonic stem cell research.
        National Academies Press, Washington, DC2005: 85-87
        • American Society for Reproductive Medicine
        Guidelines for oocyte donation.
        Fertil Steril. 2006; 86: S43-S46
        • American Society for Reproductive Medicine
        Psychological assessment of gamete donors and recipients.
        Fertil Steril. 2006; 86: S48-S49
        • Kalfoglou A.L.
        • Geller G.
        A follow-up study with oocyte donors exploring their experiences, knowledge, and attitudes about the use of their oocytes and the outcome of the donation.
        Fertil Steril. 2000; 74: 660-667
        • Seibel M.M.
        • Kiessling A.
        Compensating egg donors: equal pay for equal time?.
        N Engl J Med. 1993; 328: 737
        • McGee G.
        Subject to payment?.
        J Am Med Assoc. 1997; 278: 199-200
        • Greenfeld D.A.
        • Klock S.C.
        Disclosure decisions among known and anonymous oocyte donation recipients.
        Fertil Steril. 2004; 81: 1565-1571
        • Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine
        Repetitive oocyte donation.
        Fertil Steril. 2006; 86: S216-S217