Motivations and experiences of patients seeking cross border reproductive care The Australian and New Zealand context

Experiences of CBRC clinical care received by participants were generally rated positive in terms of treatment costs, safety, and information provided, although counseling needs being met were rated less favorably.

Like Comment


Iolanda S. Rodino, M. Psych., Sonja Goedeke, M.A., Sarah Nowoweiski, D.Psych.

Volume 102, Issue 5, Pages 1422–1431



To explore the motivations, clinical care, counseling, and support experiences of Australian and New Zealand participants considering or having participated in cross-border reproductive care (CBRC).


Questionnaire-based study.


Fertility consumer, parenting, and community websites and forums.


One hundred thirty-seven Australian and New Zealand participants aged 23–53 years.


None undertaken.

Main Outcome Measures(s):

Quantitative and qualitative responses to an anonymously completed online questionnaire.


Quantitative responses from participants indicated that motivations for engaging in CBRC included limited availability of gamete donors in their home state, difficulty in meeting treatment eligibility criteria, and treatment being legally prohibited. Experiences of CBRC were generally rated positively in terms of medical needs (91.2%), safety (89.4%), and costs (85.7%), although rated more conservatively to emotional needs being met (57.9%). Less than half the sample (47.5%) had accessed some form of CBRC-related counseling. Themes identified in qualitative analysis reflected gamete supply and demand issues, the importance of donor information and disclosure, the personal impact of legislation, and ongoing support needs after CBRC treatment.


A greater percentage of participants agreed that their CBRC clinic satisfied their overall medical needs and treatment expectations in comparison with overall emotional needs. Participants indicated access to post-treatment support counseling particularly with regard to their emotional well-being and disclosure issues to donor-conceived children would be useful. The implications of our findings for the provision of best-practice psychosocial counseling support and development of counseling guidelines are highlighted.

Read the full text at:

Fertility and Sterility

Editorial Office, American Society for Reproductive Medicine

Fertility and Sterility® is an international journal for obstetricians, gynecologists, reproductive endocrinologists, urologists, basic scientists and others who treat and investigate problems of infertility and human reproductive disorders.