[May Medically Assisted Procreation (MAP) be relevant for homosexual women? Study among 147 gynaeco-logists involved in MAP techniques].
The second part of the twentieth century has seen societal modifications as well as evolution of medical techniques allowing now thinking human procreation in terms of choices or even rights. Certain voices require sometimes Medically Assisted Procreation (MAP) for lesbians. Even though society did not allow such a possibility in France, it seemed interesting to question about it professionals actively involved in the use of MAP techniques. Through systematic internet queries, we obtained a list of one hundred private or public french medical institutions with a unit for the treatment of sterility. A telephone call to their secretary allowed us to individualize those doctors who did practice MAP. A sample of 147 medical doctors practicing MAP was then drawn. They were questioned with a clinical instrument including 20 ended-questions in order to assess their opinions on: homosexual women with a desire of a child; possibility for these clinicians to intervene with a donor insemination in such situations; developmental risk for such children. One hundred twenty five (85%) accepted to answer. Nine percent of these gynaecologists still consider homosexuality as pathological, and 10% as deviant - contrary to international classifications of mental disorders - and 5% deny good maternal abilities to homosexual women. Before the so-called french laws of bioethics in 1994, none of them had practiced a donor insemination for a lesbian couple, though 4% had realized some for single homosexual women. Two third of them do not agree opening donor insemination to homosexual women though for half of them, the anonymity of a donor is not perceived as prejudicial to the child. Eighty-seven percent of these gynaecologists think that a child brought up by homosexual parents is at risk for developmental disorder, the configuration supposed the most pathogenic being when the birth results from a donor insemination. The supposedly most important risk factors are thought to be the marginality of an homosexual family and the lack of a paternal figure at home. However, for 68% of the clinicians, this role can be taken by another male figure. These reasons make the gynaecologists reluctant to participate actively in the constitution of such a kind of family by the practice of a donor insemination. Even though demands of lesbian couples were not listed as an indication of donor insemination in the laws of bioethics, this does not seem to lessen the number of these demands in this population, and moreover if the law would allow this indication, half of these doctors would agree to practice it. The expression of the desire of a child by homosexual women and their request for its realization through medical techniques places the clinicians at the center of an ethical reflexion fed more by personal affects rather than scientific studies - however available - on the development of children brought up by an homosexual couple. Indeed, these studies indicate that these children suffer more from a societal view than parental sexual orientation, and it seems therefore appropriate to shed light on it in order to alleviate the weight of a stigmatization without any clinical argument founding it until now.