A survey of public attitudes toward uterus transplantation, surrogacy, and adoption in Japan

Akari Nakazawa, Tetsuya Hirata, Tomoko Arakawa, Natsuki Nagashima, Shinya Fukuda, Kazuaki Neriishi, Miyuki Harada, Yasushi Hirota, Kaori Koga, Osamu Wada-Hiraike, Yoshio Koizumi, Tomoyuki Fujii, Minoru Irahara and Yutaka Osuga

PLOS ONE, 2019, vol. 14, issue 10, 1-15

Abstract: This study aimed to evaluate the attitudes of male and female members of the public toward uterus transplantation (UTx), surrogacy, and adoption in Japan via a web-based survey. One thousand six hundred participants were recruited with equal segregation of age (20s, 30s, 40s, and 50s) and gender. We assessed the association between ethical view and gender, age, infertility, and the knowledge level of UTx, using a questionnaire. The findings were as follows. First, 36.5% and 31.0% of respondents agreed that UTx and gestational surrogacy should be approved, respectively. Second, the respondents would potentially choose to receive UTx (34.4%), gestational surrogacy (31.9%), and adoption (40.3%), if they or their partners experienced absolute uterine factor infertility. Third, 10.1%, 5.8%, and 14.3% of the respondents chose UTx, gestational surrogacy, and adoption as the most favorable option, respectively. Fourth, if their daughters suffered from absolute uterine factor infertility, 32.3% of female respondents might want to be donors, and 36.7% of male respondents might ask their wives to be donors. These data were affected by age, gender, infertility, or the knowledge level of UTx. UTx was a more acceptable option than gestational surrogacy and adoption. The effects of gender, age, infertility, and the level of knowledge of UTx are important in understanding the attitude toward UTx. On the other hand, there were concerns about the safety of UTx for recipients, donors, and babies. It is important to continue to understand public attitudes to inform the development and safety of UTx, which will enhance the discussion on the ethical consensus on UTx.

Date: 2019
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0223571 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 23571&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0223571

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223571

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().