served embryos has been utilized exclusively by patients whose embryoswere generated through the use of donor gametes. The use of donor gametesmay identify a cohort of patients more likely to donate frozen embryos.Whether these observations reflect a difference in attitudes toward theembryos among donor gamete users or reflects demographic factors such asage or treatment factors such as ART success rates in these individualsneeds to be determined in a larger study.

P-258

The infertility issue: Who says men don’t want to talk? L. D. Black,J. D. Delgado, P. J. Turek. Univ of CA, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA;Univ of CA Berkeley, Berkeley, CA.

Objective: To assess the level of interest in a facilitated peer supportgroup for men with infertility.

Design: During the month of February 2001, anonymous questionnaireswith an explanatory cover letter were administered to men accompanyingtheir partners to a fertility clinic, men presenting to a urology/male factorinfertility clinic, and via mass mailings to addresses obtained from a maleinfertility clinic database.

Materials/Methods: The instrument was constructed as a series of mul-tiple choice questions with an option to write in responses. Questionnaireswere designed to obtain information about: 1) male factor versus non-malefactor infertility diagnoses, 2) interest in a male factor infertility peersupport group, 3) at what point in the treatment process a support groupwould be helpful, 4) reasons for disinterest, and 5) gender preference forfacilitator(s).

Results: A total of 97/277 (35%) questionnaires were returned. Of therespondents, 84% identified themselves as having a diagnosis of male factorinfertility. In this cohort, 33% were interested (I) in a peer support group,65% were not interested (NI), and 2% were uncertain. Of the interestedgroup (I 5 33%): 78% believed a support group would be helpful duringtreatment, 59% during the initial evaluation process, 41% after or betweentreatment cycles, and 33% during pregnancy; 67% had no gender preferencefor the facilitator, 22% preferred a male facilitator, 7% preferred both a maleand a female, and 4% preferred a female. Of the men who were notinterested in a peer support group (NI5 65%): 28% noted they were toobusy, 26% didn’t want to spend more time thinking about infertility, 15%were not interested in talking about their feelings, and 11% were concernedabout confidentiality.

Conclusions: Contrary to assumptions about men’s unwillingness to sharetheir experiences, approximately 1 out of 3 men with male factor infertilityis interested in a facilitated peer support group. They reported the highestlevel of interest during the initial evaluation and treatment process, and themajority had no preference for the gender of the support group facilitator.

P-259

The impact of spirituality/religiosity on distress in infertile women.A. D. Domar, B. Nielsen, J. Dusek, D. Paul, A. S. Penzias, D. Merari. BethIsrael Deaconess Medical Ctr, Boston, MA; Boston IVF, Boston, MA.

Objective: The relationship between spirituality, religiosity, and the psy-chological impact of infertility is unexplored. Research with other medicalpopulations indicates that individuals with strong religious beliefs experi-ence less distress than do less religious patients. However, in the infertilepopulation, clinical anecdotes suggest that some religious patients mayinterpret their infertility as a punishment from God and thus experienceincreased levels of distress.

Design: Cross-sectional survey.Materials/Methods: Expedited IRB approval was obtained for this study.

One hundred ninety five women waiting to have an appointment with aninfertility specialist completed a demographic questionnaire, the Beck De-pression Inventory (BDI), the Fertility Problem Inventory (FPI) and theSpirituality Well-Being Scale (SWBS).

Results: The mean age of the sample was 36.4 years (range 22–47). Thesample was primarily Christian (Catholic 53%, Protestant 18%), 65% re-ported currently attending religious services, 79% reported that they pray ormeditate, 24% reported becoming more religious since experiencing infer-tility, and 73% reported being a pessimist rather than an optimist. The meanduration of infertility and infertility treatment was 31 and 18 months

respectively. There were significant correlations between self-report ofspirituality/religiosity and psychological distress. Subjects with higherscores on the SWBS had lower scores on the FPI (P, 0.0001) and the BDI(P , 0.0001).

Conclusions: In infertile women, an increased level of spiritual well-being was significantly associated with less infertility distress and depres-sive symptoms. The results of this study suggest that spirituality/religiosityplays an important role in the psychological health of infertile women.

Supported by: The Mind/Body Center for Women’s Health, The Mind/Body Medical Institute.

P-260

The effect of husbands’ and wives’ responses to infertility on maritalcommunication and adjustment. L. A. Pasch, C. Dunkel-Schetter, A.Christensen. Univ of CA, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA; Univ of CA,Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA.

Objective: It has been shown that men and women respond differently tothe experience of infertility. These differences are often thought to causeconflict within infertile couples. The purpose of this study was to test atheoretical model that proposes that partners’ responses to infertility areassociated with the quality of marital communication about infertility, andin turn, with the effect of infertility on the marriage as a whole.

Design: This study used a cross-sectional design involving 48 coupleswho had presented for treatment at infertility specialists in Southern Cali-fornia.

Materials/Methods: Couples took part in a home interview session inwhich each partner provided questionnaire data, participated in an individ-ual interview about their responses to infertility, and in a 15-minute com-munication task with their partner. Response to infertility consisted ofparticipant ratings of the importance of having children, involvement intreatment, desire for talking with partner about trying to have a baby, andthe effect of infertility on self-esteem. For the communication task, coupleswere instructed to talk about an area of difficulty in their relationship relatedto their fertility problem (e.g., deciding next steps in treatment). Thediscussions were audiotaped and coded using the Couples Rating System.The Negative Affect dimension was used, with high scores indicatingexpression of hostility. Participants also completed a questionnaire of per-ceived effects of infertility on the marriage as a whole. Statistical analysesinvolved using paired t-tests to compare husbands’ and wives’ responses toinfertility, and hierarchical multiple regression to test the theoretical model.

Results: Having children was more important to wives than husbands(p , .05), wives were more involved in the treatment process (p, .0001),wanted to talk with their partner more about trying to have a baby (p,.0001), and experienced a greater loss of self-esteem than their husbands(p , .0001). Results of the test of the theoretical model showed that to theextent that husbands saw having children as important, were involved intrying to have a baby, or wanted to talk with their wives about trying to havea baby, they exhibited less anger and hostility when discussing infertilitywith their wives (rsq change5 .15, .28, .10, respectively). More anger andhostility was associated with wives perceiving a more negative effect ofinfertility on the marriage (rsq5 2.51, p , .0001). Wives’ responses toinfertility were unrelated to the quality of communication and to the effectof infertility on the marriage. Differences between partners in response toinfertility were not associated with marital communication or adjustment,after the effect of each partner’s individual response was controlled.

Conclusions: The results of this study confirm previously reported genderdifferences in response to infertility. Furthermore, they support the proposedmodel, suggesting that responses to infertility, particularly husbands’ re-sponses, are associated with the quality of marital communication and withthe effect of infertility on the marriage as a whole. Increases in husbands’interest, participation and involvement in infertility treatment may lead topositive changes in marital communication about infertility, and to a morepositive effect of infertility on the marriage.

P-261

Towards a behavioral picture of infertility patients. K. Bevilacqua,D. H. Barad. Albert Einstein Coll of Medicine, Brooklyn, NY; AlbertEinstein Coll of Medicine, Bronx, NY.

S198 Abstracts Vol. 76, No. 3, Suppl. 1, September 2001