Freezing fertility or freezing false hope? A content analysis of social egg freezing in U.S. print media

In 2012, the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) lifted the experimental label on oocyte preservation, but cautioned against women using it to avoid age-related infertility, known as social egg freezing (SEF). In 2014, Facebook and Apple announced that they would offer SEF as a workplace benefit. Within the context of a rapidly growing market for SEF, we were interested in how these two decisions affected media discussions, given that such discourse can strongly influence public perceptions and behaviors. We used a content analysis methodology to code 138 articles published in U.S. newspapers and magazines between 2012 and 2015. Focusing on a financial concern over the cost of SEF and the lack of insurance for SEF, we found that media portrayals of SEF pivot away from the ethical principle of nonmaleficence centered in the ASRM decision to discourage SEF. Instead, they highlight an issue of justice that can be remedied through the offer of SEF as a workplace benefit. Overall, media portrayals of SEF paint a simplistic and rosy picture that more options, especially more reproductive and economic options, automatically enhance women's autonomy.