The patients’ perspective at the ESHRE Annual Meeting

The European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) has generously given Fertility Europe time in the main program of their Annual Meeting. This ‘Patient Session’ consists of three or four lectures which focus on the patients’ perspective of a particular subject.

Next meeting: Barcelona 2018


(3 July 2018, 14.00-15.00)

Surrogacy – the patients’ perspective

  • Amrita Pande: ‘Surrogacy and stratified kinship’
  • Ana Galhardo (Portugal): ‘Surrogacy in Portugal – from struggle to accomplishment’
  • Kaisa Kivipuro (Finland): ‘What it is to be a wombless woman in the age of ART’s? Patient’s perspective on gestational surrogacy in Finland’


Past meetings


Geneva 2017

Pushing things forward: accelerating change – patient association role in MAR

(4 July 2017, 14.00-15.00)

  • Satu Rautakallio-Hokkanen (Finland), Chair of Fertility Europe Executive Committee: ’25 million people matter. Patients network as a driving force in Europe.’ ‘When you are diagnosed with infertility you are at your weakest when you have to be at your strongest.’
  • Jose Knijnenburg (The Netherlands) from Freya: ‘Questions? Questions! How can patients contribute to improvement of fertility care?’ By teaching and encouraging patients to ask questions to empower them. And by Freya asking questions: to patients about what they need and have experienced, and to caregivers about the clinics’ practice.’
  • Irina Popova (Bulgaria) from Zachatie Sdrujenie: ‘Reproductive health education of adolescent as a tool for early prevention of infertility.’
  • Irena Lodder Rozic (Croatia) from RODA – Roditelji u akciji: ‘MAR in Croatia: Retrospective and Prospective. The role of patients’ organisation in positive change of MAR practices.’


Helsinki 2016

Embryo and Double Gamete Donation

Article in ‘Focus on Reproduction’ about the session 

Fertility Europe report: Double gamete and embryo donation in 23 countries


Lisbon 2015

Social infertility vs. medical infertility

  • Diana Guerra Diaz (Spain): ‘Psychosocial differences between medical and social infertility.’
  • Ana Galhardo (Portugal): ‘Are there other choices? Attitudes towards social freezing, gamete donation and surrogacy in young adults in reproductive age.’
  • Karoline Steckley: ‘Missing the Fertility Train? Italian lifestyle, social structure, economy and how the country that loves kids is making it difficult to have them.’
  • Irina Popova (Bulgaria): ‘The late lessons of delayed motherhood – from a patient’s perspective.’


Munich 2014

Social infertility (e.g. gamete freezing for social reasons; delayed pregnancy; age factor)

  • Rita Vassena (Spain): ‘Social egg freezing- the clinician point of view: information, indications and expectations.’
  • Vanya Savova (Bulgaria): ‘The Conflict between Psychology and Medicine – Social Freezing Motivation and Consequences.’
  • Hana Konečná (Czech Republic): ‘Social freezing, unlimited access and open identity – a Rainmaker?’
  • Fernando Oliveira (Portugal): ‘Medicalizing and socializing infertility in the 21st century.’


London 2013

Managing relationship through infertility

  • Sheila Pike (UK): ‘Decision-making, ending treatment and the couple relationship: a counselor’s perspective.’
  • Helga Sol (Iceland): ‘Love, sex and infertility. The art of growing as a couple when dealing with infertility.’
  • Erikjan Bor (The Netherlands): ‘Surviving Infertility: How I never became a dad, but still going strong with my wife.’
  • Tim Child (UK): ‘Ending fertility treatment- when, why and how should clinicians advise our patients?’


Istanbul 2012

Quality in various aspects of fertility treatment (quality of medical care, quality of clinics, quality of information, quality of life)

  • Willianne Nelen (The Netherlands): ‘The role of clinical guidelines in quality of care.’
  • Alina Beatris David (Romania): ‘Quality in MAR perceived by the Eastern European Patient.’
  • Elin Einarsdottir (Iceland): ‘Quality of Treatment, when there is only ONE.’
  • Peter Thompson (UK): ‘Quality from the Regulator’s perspective’


Stockholm 2011

Education in fertility awareness. From prevention to action: whose duty?

  • Hana Konečná (Czech Republic): ‘Reproductive medicine: good servant but bad boss?
  • Tanja Tydén (Sweden): ‘Attitudes to and awareness of fertility issues among adolescents and young adults in Sweden.’
  • Geertrui de Cock (Belgium): ‘Infertility prevention campaign: a multi-stakeholder example from Flanders, Belgium’


Rome 2010

How patient-friendly is patient-friendly? A global overview.

  • Guido Pennings (Belgium):’The ethical approach to patient friendly AR’
  • Vincenza Zambaldi (Italy): ‘Patient-friendliness in Italy – which will represent the Western-European perspective’
  • Denisa Priadková (Slovak Republic): ‘How patient-friendly in Eastern European countries is translated into a quick way to IVF, with a lack of information about choices etc.’
  • Gamal Serour (Egypt): ‘What does patient-friendly mean in the developing countries?’


Amsterdam 2009


  • José Knijnenburg (The Netherlands): ‘Broad collaboration for new guidelines in the Netherlands; The role of the patients.’

who else spoke?