2004
Volume 38, Issue 2
  • ISSN: 1567-7109
  • E-ISSN: 2468-1652

Abstract

Abstract

Donor-conceived families, families by egg, sperm, or embryo donation, are seen as the “new families”, who until recently were hidden in society. This research project explores the way in which donor-conceived families are included within the school context and which class, school or teacher characteristics influence the implementation of the topic of donor conception/donor-conceived families in class. The project contains a quantitative, explorative study in which 151 teachers were inquired and two qualitative studies in which 16 teachers/student support staff were interviewed. Our results show that donor conception/donor-conceived families are very little included in the school context and that both school characteristics (multiculturalism) and teacher characteristics (lack of knowledge, being religious) hinder discussing the topic in class. Supporting teachers by offering them prepared teaching modules, facilitated the inclusion of the topic in the school curriculum and the acceptance to talk about it in class. This pioneering study offers an impulse for further research in which donor-conceived offspring themselves can be inquired about their school experiences.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/PED2018.2.007.INDE
2018-12-01
2021-09-21
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/15677109/38/2/07_PED2018.2.INDE.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.5117/PED2018.2.007.INDE&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Bateman Novaes, S.(1998). The medical management of donor insemination. In K.Daniels & E.Haimes (Eds.), Donor insemination: International social science perspectives (pp. 105-130). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bishop, M.C., & Atlas, J.G.(2015). School curriculum, policies, and practices regarding lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender families. Education and Urban Society, 47, 766-784.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bower, L.A.(2008). Standing up for diversity: Lesbian mothers’ suggestions for teachers. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 44, 181-183.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Casper, V., & Schultz, S.(1999). Gay parents/straight schools: Building communication and trust. New York, NY: Teacher’s College Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Daniels, K.(2002). Toward a family-building approach to donor insemination. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada, 24, 17-21.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Daniels, K.(2006). Is blood really thicker than water? Assisted reproduction and its impact on our thinking about family. Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics & Gynecology, 26, 265-270.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Daniels, K., & Thorn, P.(2001). Sharing information with donor insemination offspring: A child-conception versus a family-building approach. Human Reproduction,16, 1792-1796.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Daniels, K.R., Kramer, W., & Perez-y-Perez, M.V.(2012). Semen donors who are open to contact with their offspring: Issues and implications for them and their families. Reproductive Biomedicine Online, 25, 670-677.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Donor Conception Network
    Donor Conception Network(2014). The young people’s panel share their experiences and thoughts on our new publication and more. Donor Conception Network Journal, 10, 7-12.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Donor Conception Network
    Donor Conception Network(2017). Five go to Bristol. Donor Conception Network Journal, 17, 8-13.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Donor Conception Network
    Donor Conception Network(2018). Primary Schools Resources (for parents, children and teachers). Geraadpleegd via https://www.dcnetwork.org/products/product/primary-schools-resources-parents-children-and-teachers
    [Google Scholar]
  12. ESHRE Task Force on Ethics and Law
    ESHRE Task Force on Ethics and Law(2002). Gamete and embryo donation. Human Reproduction, 17, 1407-1408.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Freeman, T., Graham, S., Ebtehaj, F., & Richards, M.(2014). Relatedness in assisted reproduction: Families, origins and identities. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network & Harris Interactive (GLSEN)
    Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network & Harris Interactive (GLSEN). (2008). The principal’s perspective: School safety, bullying and harassment. A survey of public school principals. New York, NY: Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A.(1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, USA: Aldine Publishing Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Goldberg, A.E, & Smith, J.Z.(2014). Preschool selection considerations and experiences of school-mistreatment among lesbian, gay, and heterosexual adoptive parents. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 29, 64-75. doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2013.09.006
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Golombok, S.(2015). Modern Families. Parents and children in new family forms. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Haimes, E., & Daniels, K.(1998). International social science perspectives on donor insemination: an introduction. In K.Daniels & E.Haimes E (Eds.), Donor Insemination: International Social Science Perspectives (pp. 1-6). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Hennink, M., Hutter, I., & Bailey, A.(2011). Qualitative research methods. London, UK: SAGE Publications Ltd.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Hudson, N., Culley, L., Rapport, F., Johnson, M., & Bharadwaj, A.(2009). “Public” perceptions of gamete donation: A research review. Public Understanding of Science, 18, 61-77. doi:10.1177/0963662507078396
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Indekeu, A., & Bastiaansen, L.(2016). Donorconceptie: Lespakket voor de 3de graad ASO/TSO. Ongepubliceerd lesmateriaal te verkrijgen via [email protected]
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Indekeu, A., & Lampic, C. (ingediend). Societal perceptions on donor-conceived families: The perspective of school teachers.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Isaksson, S., Skoog Svanberg, A., Sydsjö, G., Thurin-Kjellberg, A., Karlström, P.O., Solensten, N.G., & Lampic, C.(2011). Two decades after legislation on identifiable donors in Sweden: Are recipient couples ready to be open about using gamete donation?Human Reproduction, 26, 853-860. doi:10.1093/humrep/deq365.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Kintner-Duffy, V.L., Vardell, R., Lower, J.K., & Cassidy, D.J.(2012). “The changers and the changed”: Preparing early childhood teachers to work with lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender families. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 33,208-223.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Lamme, L.L., & Lamme, L.A.(2002). Welcoming children from gay families into our schools. Educational Leadership, 59(4), 65-69. Geraadpleegd via www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership.aspx
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Leemans, L. (1 januari 2016). Je leerlingen groeien niet op in een traditioneel gezin. Klasse. Geraadpleegd via www.klasse.be
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Lindsay, J., Perlesz, A., Brown, R., McNair, R., De Vaus, D., & Pitts, M.(2006). Stigma or respect: Lesbian-parented families negotiating school settings. Sociology, 40, 1059-1077.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Nachtigall, R., Tschann, J., Quiroga, S.S., Pitcher, L., & Becker, G.(1997). Stigma, disclosure, and family functioning among parents of children conceived through donor insemination. Fertility and Sterility, 68, 83-89.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Nijs, P., & Rouffa, L.(1975). A.I.D.-couples: Psychological and psychopathological evaluation. Andrologia, 7, 187-194. x
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Nuffield Council on Bioethics
    Nuffield Council on Bioethics(2013). Donor conception: Ethical aspects of information sharing. Geraadpleegd via nuffieldbioethics.org/project/donor-conception
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Persaud, S., Freeman, T., Jadva, V., Slutsky, J., Kramer, W., Steele, M., … & Golombok, S.(2017). Adolescents conceived through donor insemination in mother-headed families: A qualitative study of motivations and experiences of contacting and meeting same-donor offspring. Children & Society, 31, 13-22. doi:0.1111/chso.12158
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Ray, V., & Gregory, R.(2001). School experiences of the children of lesbian and gay parents. Family Matters, 59, 28-34. Geraadpleegd via https://aifs.gov.au/publications/family-matters
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Robinson, K.H.(2002). Making the invisible visible: Gay and lesbian issues in early childhood education. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 3, 415-434.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Ryan, D.P., & Martin, A.(2000). Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender parents in the school systems. School Psychology Review, 29, 10.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Schoysman, R., & Schoysman-Deboeck, A.(1980). Present status of donor insemination in Belgium. In G.David & W.S.Price (Eds.), Human artificial insemination and semen preservation (pp. 27-29). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Sijbers, R., Elfering, S., Lubbers, M., Scheepers, P., & Wolbers, M.(2015). Maatschappelijke thema’s in de klas: Hoe moeilijk is dat?Nijmegen: ITS, Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen. Geraadpleegd via its.ruhosting.nl/publicaties/pdf/r2033.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Taymans, J.M., Marotta, S.A., Lynch, S.J., Riley, D.B., Oritz, D.M., LaFauci Schutt, J.M. … & EmbichJ.L.(2008). Adoption as a diversity issue in professional preparation: Perceptions of preservice education professionals. Adoption Quarterly, 11, 24-44.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Thorn, P., & Daniels, K.(2007). Arguments for and against information sharing in families created with the help of DI – Recent developments and the results of an exploratory study. Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde, 67, 993-1001.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Van den Akker, O.B., Crawshaw, M.A., Blyth, E.D., & Frith, L.J.(2015). Expectations and experiences of gamete donors and donor-conceived adults searching for genetic relatives using DNA linking through a voluntary register. Human Reproduction, 30, 111-121.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. VARTA
    VARTA(2014). Fertility and Assisted Reproduction: Teaching modules. For primary and secondary schools. Geraadpleegd via https://www.varta.org.au/resources/publications/fertility-and-assisted-reproduction-teaching-module
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Vlaams Ministerie van Onderwijs en Vorming
    Vlaams Ministerie van Onderwijs en Vorming(2017). Vlaams onderwijs in cijfers: Schooljaar 2016-2017. Geraadpleegd via https://onderwijs.vlaanderen.be
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Vlaams Ministerie van Onderwijs en Vorming
    Vlaams Ministerie van Onderwijs en Vorming (17 mei 2016). Minister Crevits trekt met bouwpakket voor onderwijs naar Parijs op de Internationale Dag tegen Homofobie en Transfobie. Geraadpleegd via https://onderwijs.vlaanderen.be
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Wennberg, A.L., Rodriguez-Wallberg, K.A., Milsom, I., & Brännström, M.(2016). Attitudes towards new assisted reproductive technologies in Sweden: A survey in women 30-39 years of age. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 95, 38-44.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.5117/PED2018.2.007.INDE
Loading
/content/journals/10.5117/PED2018.2.007.INDE
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): donor conception; donor-conceived families; inclusion; school; teachers
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error