(London, United Kingdom) A new Europe-wide survey launched during the 42nd Annual Meeting of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) suggests broad public support for fertility treatment and several areas of reproductive research, while highlighting key areas where public understanding and opinion continue to develop.[1]
The report, 'Fertility, Embryo Research and Genome Editing: Public Attitudes in Europe', was commissioned by the charity, Progress Educational Trust (PET), supported by ESHRE and conducted by Ipsos. It explored public attitudes towards fertility treatment, embryo research, genome editing, surrogacy and related topics across the UK, Netherlands, Spain and Italy.
The survey included 8,688 participants aged 16–75 years, with more than 2,000 respondents in each country. Samples were designed to be representative of national populations according to age, gender, region and working status.
Across all four countries, a majority of respondents supported state-funded fertility treatment for people experiencing infertility and wishing to conceive, ranging from 54% in the Netherlands to 64% in Italy.
The survey also found public backing for the use of human embryos in research to better understand and develop treatments for congenital diseases. Support ranged from 41% in Italy to 48% in the Netherlands and Spain, exceeding opposition in all four countries surveyed, including Italy, where research uses of human embryos are currently prohibited.
Views became more nuanced when respondents were asked about emerging applications and future developments. Support for genome editing varied depending on its intended use, with the strongest support seen for eliminating severe or life-threatening conditions in embryos intended for pregnancy, ranging from 46% in Italy to 55% in the Netherlands. A majority of respondents in the UK, Netherlands and Spain supported this use, despite such applications not currently being permitted in any of the four countries surveyed.
Professor Karen Sermon, Immediate Past Chair of ESHRE, said, "Reproductive medicine and embryo research are advancing rapidly, and these findings show the importance of understanding how the public views those developments. It is particularly striking that support for some applications extends beyond what is currently permitted in certain countries. As science advances, it is essential that public awareness keeps pace, so that decisions about future treatments are informed by both evidence and societal values."
The survey also highlighted areas where many people had not yet formed firm opinions. Among respondents who supported, or neither supported nor opposed, the use of human embryos in research, the most common view was that the current 14-day limit on embryo research is "about right". However, more than a quarter (27%) of respondents asked about the 14-day limit said they did not know whether it was too long, too short or about right.
Respondents were also asked what circumstances, if any, might justify extending the 14-day limit to 28 days. Among those who supported, or neither supported nor opposed, embryo research, the most popular justification for extending the limit was finding new treatments for congenital diseases. Taken together, these findings suggest that many people have not yet reached a settled view on this issue and that understanding the potential medical benefits of embryo research may play an important role in shaping future attitudes.
Generational differences in attitudes were observed across several topics explored in the survey, including sex selection, fertility treatment access and embryo research. Across the survey as a whole, only a small proportion of respondents selected "Prefer not to answer", suggesting a willingness to engage with these issues even where views had not yet been fully formed.
"This report is filled with rich insights into the public's views on scientifically, legally and ethically complex issues," said Sarah Norcross, Director of the Progress Educational Trust. "There are some surprising findings, such as younger respondents in all four countries being more likely than older respondents to say that sex selection should be permitted. It is also striking that in each of the four countries, the number of respondents saying that surrogacy should be permitted exceeds the number who say that surrogacy should be prohibited."
