T. M. Dadaeva, V. V. Baranova. Assisted Reproductive Technology and the Reproductive Behavior of Urban Youth (Experience of a Pilot Study)

UDK 618-053.81(1-21)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.15507/2413-1407.106.027.201901.138-155

Introduction. The use of assisted reproductive technology in a situation of a demographic crisis can contribute to an increase in the birth rate among childless parents. The paper is of relevance as there is a need for a sociological analysis of the youth’s attitudes towards the use of assisted reproductive technology. The purpose of the article is to reveal significant factors affecting the youth’s attitudes towards assisted reproductive technology and its application, based on the results of a case study conducted among young people residing in the city of Saransk.

Materials and Methods. The study used the methods of analysis, comparison and correlation. The data of a pilot survey conducted among young people residing in the city of Saransk and statistics were used as the empirical base of the study. The data were collected on the basis of the methodology developed by the authors according to quota sampling (by sex, age and place of residence).

Results. The study has revealed the correlation between the respondents’ awareness of assisted reproductive technology and their level of education, age and marital status. It has been established that those respondents who took advantage of assisted reproductive technology, more often used such methods as in vitro fertilization, intracytoplasmic sperm injection and surrogacy. The authors have formulated proposals on the need for the state to increase funding for the assisted reproductive technology programs, when it concerns reproductive health, to allocate quotas, ensuring the availability of the technology for the enforcement of the reproductive rights in society, as well as to inform the public about new types of assisted reproductive technology.

Discussion and Conclusion. The results of the study can be used by the authorities, staff of reproductive health centers and in vitro fertilization clinics to develop and plan assisted reproductive technology programs, for conducting monitoring studies on the use of assisted reproductive technology. Prospects for the study are associated with conducting further in-depth qualitative research on parents using assisted reproductive technology.

Keywords: assisted reproductive technology, infertility, in vitro fertilization, surrogacy, reproductive behavior, sociological survey, urban youth


1. Styhre A., Arman R. Institutionalizing Assisted Reproductive Technologies: The Role of Science, Professionalism and Regulatory Contrоl, Routledge Studies in the Sociology of Health and Illness. Abingdon, Oxon; New York, NY: Routledge; 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315751795

2. Becker G., Butler A., Nachtigall R.D. Resemblance Talk: A Challenge for Parents Whose Children Were Conceived with Donor Gametes in the US. Social Science and Medicine. 2005; 61(6):1300-1309. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soc­scimed.2005.01.018

3. Edwards J. Born and Bred: Idioms of Kinship and New Reproductive Technologies in England. Oxford: University Press; 2000. Available at: https://global.oup.com/academic/product/born-and-bred-9780198233947?cc=r... (accessed 03.10.2018).

4. Grace V.M., Daniels K.R., Gillett W. The Donor, the Father, and the Imaginary Constitution of the Family: Parents’ Constructions in the Case of Donor Insem. Social Science and Medicine. 2008; 66(2):301-314. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.08.029

5. Almeling R., Willey I. Saame Medicine, Different Reasons: Comparing Women’s Bodily Experiences of Producing Eggs for Pregnancy or for Profit. Social Science and Medicine. 2017; 188:21-29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soc­scimed.2017.06.027

6. Kılıç A., Göçmen İ. Fate, Morals and Rational Calculations: Freezing Eggs for Non-medical Reasons in Turkey. Social Science and Medicine. 2018; Vol. 203:19-27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.03.014

7. Almeling R. Sex Cells: The Medical Market for Eggs and Sperm . Berkeley, University of California Press; 2011. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/j.ctt1pnt3x (accessed 03.10.2018).

8. Almeling R. Selling Genes, Selling Gender: Egg Agencies, Sperm Banks, and the Medical Market in Genetic Material. American Sociological Review. 2007; 72(3):319-340. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240707200301

9. Deech R. Reproductive Tourism in Europe: Infertility and Human Rights. Global Governance. 2003; 9(4):425-432. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/27800494?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents (accessed 03.10.2018).

10. Saravanan S. A Transnational Feminist View of Surrogacy Biomarkets in India. Singapore: Springer Verlag; 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6869-0

11. Wahlberg А. Good Quality: The Routinization of Sperm Banking in China. University of California Press; 2018. Available at: https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520297784/good-quality (accessed 03.10.2018).

12. Isupova O.G. Births as a Value in the Internet Discourse of Subfertile Women Discussing Egg Donation and Surrogate Motherhood. Zhurnal issledovanij sotsialnoj politiki = The Journal of Social Policy Studies. 2014; (3):381-393. Available at: https://jsps.hse.ru/article/view/3370 (accessed 03.10.2018). (In Russ.)

13. Tkach O.A. “Half-Related”? Problematisation of Kinship and Family in Print Media Discussing Assisted Reproductive Technologies. Zhurnal issledovanij sotsialnoj politiki = The Journal of Social Policy Studies. 2013; 11(1):49-68. Available at: https://jsps.hse.ru/article/view/3447 (accessed 03.10.2018). (In Russ.)

14. Rusanova N. Assisted Reproductive Technologies in Russia: History, Problems, Demographic Prospects. Zhurnal issledovanij sotsialnoj politiki = The Journal of Social Policy Studies. 2013; 11(1):69-86. Available at: https://jsps.hse.ru/article/view/3448 (accessed 03.10.2018). (In Russ.)

15. Isupova O.G. Assisted Reproductive Technologies: New Opportunities. Demograficheskoe obozrenie = Demographic Review. 2017; 4(1):35-64. (In Russ.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.17323/demreview.v4i1.6987

16. Bogomyagkova E.S. Assisted Reproductive Technologies in the Context of Social Inequality. Sotsiologiya nauki i tekhnologij = Sociology of Science and Technology. 2015; 6(4):98-109. Available at: http://sst.nw.ru/ru/archive/snit201564/ (accessed 03.10.2018). (In Russ.)

Submitted 12.07.2018; accepted for publication 13.09.2018; published online 29.03.2019.

About the authors:

Tatiana M. Dadaeva, Professor, Department of Sociology, National Research Mordovia State University (68/1 Bolshevistskaya St., Saransk 430005, Russia), Dr. Sci. (Sociology), ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9749-9244, dadaeva13@mail.ru

Victoria V. Baranova, Undergraduate Student, National Research Mordovia State University (68/1 Bolshevistskaya St., Saransk 430005, Russia), ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0860-0003, vikylj-barano@yandex.ru

Contribution of the authors:

Tatiana M. Dadaeva – formulation of the basic concept of the research; data collection and analysis; preparation of the initial version of the text; revision of the text.

Victoria V. Baranova – data collection and analysis; visualization; computer modeling and presentation of data in the text; computer works; critical analysis and revision of the text.

For citation:

Dadaeva T.M., Baranova V.V. Assisted Reproductive Technology and the Reproductive Behavior of Urban Youth (Experience of a Pilot Study). Regionologiya = Regionology. 2019; 27(1):138-155. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15507/2413-1407.106.027.201901.138-155

The authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

To download article

Лицензия Creative Commons
Материалы журнала "РЕГИОНОЛОГИЯ REGIONOLOGY" доступны по лицензии Creative Commons «Attribution» («Атрибуция») 4.0 Всемирная