Attitude of Jordanian Health Care Workers Toward Surrogacy
Objective: To assess the attitude of Jordanian health care workers toward surrogacy.
Materials and methods: Three municipalities in Jordan were randomly selected, one from each region: north, south and central of Jordan. A total of: four public hospitals, three private hospitals, one university hospital, 40 health centers and 40 private clinics were included in the study. Healthcare workers in the selected facilities were randomly approached using a self– administered questionnaire to collect data. Distributions of attitude by gender, job title, and physician’s specialty were used to describe participants’ attitude toward surrogacy.
Results: Responses of 382 participants were reported, of whom, 230 (60.2%) were females. Three in every four participants didn’t support legalizing surrogacy in Jordan. Majority reported negative attitude toward commercial surrogacy (85.1%) and noncommercial surrogacy (76.4%). Religious considerations were the main reason (71.1%) for the attitude toward surrogacy. Most items describing attitude toward surrogacy were significantly distributed across different job titles: nurses, medical doctors, and other healthcare workers (p < 0.05).
Conclusion: Negative attitude among health care workers toward surrogacy was mainly driven by religious beliefs. However, there are core cultural changes in the community which might alter the attitude toward surrogacy in the future.
J Med Ethics 2009; 35: 320-2.
2. Serafini P. Outcome and follow-up of children born after IVF-surrogacy. Hum Reprod Update 2001; 7: 23-7.
3. Utian WH, Sheean L, Goldfarb JM, Kiwi R. Successful pregnancy after in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer from an infertile woman to a surrogate. N Engl J Med 1985; 313: 1351-2.
4. Sheean LA, Goldfarb JM, Kiwi R, Utian WH. In vitro fertilization (IVF)-surrogacy: application of IVF to women without functional uteri. J In Vitro Fert Embryo Transf 1989; 6: 134-7.
5. Shenfield F, Pennings G, Cohen J, Devroey P, de Wert G, Tarlatzis B. ESHRE Task Force on Ethics and Law 10: surrogacy. Hum Reprod 2005; 20: 2705-7.
6. Drabiak K, Wegner C, Fredland V, Helft PR. Ethics, law, and commercial surrogacy: a call for uniformity. J Law Med Ethics 2007; 35: 300-9.
7. Patel NH, Jadeja YD, Bhadarka HK, Patel MN, Patel NH, Sodagar NR. Insight into Different Aspects of Surrogacy Practices. J Hum Reprod Sci 2018; 11: 212-8.
8. English ME, Mechanick-Braverman A, Corson SL. Semantics and science: the distinction between gestational carrier and traditional surrogacy options. Womens Health Issues 1991; 1: 155-7.
9. Soderstrom-Anttila V, Wennerholm UB, Loft A, Pinborg A, Aittomaki K, Romundstad LB, et al. Surrogacy: outcomes for surrogate mothers, children and the resulting families-a systematic review. Hum Reprod Update 2016; 22: 260-76.
10. Wennberg AL, Rodriguez-Wallberg KA, Milsom I, Brännström M. Attitudes towards new assisted reproductive technologies in Sweden: a survey in women 30-39 years of age. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2016; 95: 38-44.
11. Stobel-Richter Y, Goldschmidt S, Brahler E, Weidner K, Beutel M. Egg donation, surrogate mothering, and cloning: attitudes of men and women in Germany based on a representative survey. Fertil Steril 2009; 92:
12. Baykal B, Korkmaz C, Ceyhan ST, Goktolga U, Baser I. Opinions of infertile Turkish women on gamete donation and gestational surrogacy. Fertil Steril 2008; 89: 817-22.
13. Suzuki K, Hoshi K, Minai J, Yanaihara T, Takeda Y, Yamagata Z. Analysis of national representative opinion surveys concerning gestational surrogacy in Japan. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2006; 126: 39-47.
14. Kian EM, Riazi H, Bashirian S. Attitudes of Iranian infertile couples toward surrogacy. J Hum Reprod Sci 2014; 7: 47-51.
15. Daniluk JC, Koert E. Childless Canadian men's and women's childbearing intentions, attitudes towards and willingness to use assisted human reproduction. Hum Reprod 2012; 27: 2405-12.
16. Minai J, Suzuki K, Takeda Y, Hoshi K, Yamagata Z. There are gender differences in attitudes toward surrogacy when information on this technique is provided. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2007; 132: 193-9.
17. Ahmad NH. Assisted reproduction--Islamic views on the science of procreation. Eubios J Asian Int Bioeth 2003; 13: 59-61.
18. Schenker JG. Assisted reproductive practice: religious perspectives. Reprod Biomed Online 2005; 10: 310-9.
19. Aboulghar M, Serour GI, Mansour RT. Ethical aspects and regulation of assisted reproduction in the Arabic-speaking world. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 2007; 14: 143-6.
20. Serour GI. Ethical issues in human reproduction: Islamic perspectives. Gynecol Endocrinol 2013; 29: 949-52.
21. Mustafa AG, Alzoubi KH, Khabour OF, Alfaqih MA. Perspectives and attitudes of Jordanian medical and paramedical students toward surrogate pregnancy. Int J Womens Health 2018; 10: 617-22.
22. Londra L, Wallach E, Zhao Y. Assisted reproduction:
Ethical and legal issues. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med 2014; 19: 264-71.
23. Adamson GD. Global cultural and socioeconomic factors that influence access to assisted reproductive technologies. Womens Health (Lond) 2009; 5: 351-8.
24. Inhorn M. Local Babies, Global Science: Gender, Religion, and In Vitro Fertilization in Egypt. Local Babies Global Science: Gender, Religion, and in Vitro Fertilization in Egypt 2012: 1-310.
25. Ahmadi A, Bamdad S. Assisted reproductive technologies and the Iranian community attitude towards infertility. Hum Fertil (Camb) 2017; 20: 204-11.
26. Stenfelt C, Armuand G, Wanggren K, Skoog Svanberg A, Sydsjo G. Attitudes toward surrogacy among doctors working in reproductive medicine and obstetric care in Sweden. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2018; 97: 1114-21.
27. Hostiuc S. Conventional vs unconventional assisted reproductive technologies: opinions of young physicians. J Obstet Gynaecol 2013; 33: 67-70.
28. Bruce-Hickman K, Kirkland L, Ba-Obeid T. The attitudes and knowledge of medical students towards surrogacy. J Obstet Gynaecol 2009; 29: 229-32.
29. Muaygil RA. Reexamining the Prohibition of Gestational Surrogacy in Sunni Islam. Dev World Bioeth 2017; 17: 112-20.
30. Al-Bar MA, Chamsi-Pasha H. Contemporary Bioethics: Islamic Perspective [Internet] Cham(CH). Springer; 2015.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.