Sperm Donation: Implications of Canada’s Assisted Human Reproduction Act 2004 for Recipients, Donors, Health Professionals, and Institutions

Sperm donation and its application in China: a 7-year multicenter retrospective study

“…In 2004, Canada's Assisted Human Reproduction Act was changed to make it illegal for sperm banks to pay for sperm. 18 Following its enactment, the number of sperm donors declined, 19 and the number of sperm banks decreased from 40 to only a single center, the Toronto Institute for Reproductive Medicine, located in Ontario. Approximately 80% of Canada's donor sperm is imported from the United States, where a higher level of monetary compensation is allowed for participating sperm donors.…”

Oncofertility in Canada: cryopreservation and alternative options for future parenthood

“…The gravity of the supply problem may be less with donor sperm than with donor oocytes; however, the legislative restrictions of the Assisted Human Reproduction Act (instituted in 2004, prohibiting the purchase of gametes) and of Health Canada's strict screening protocols have highlighted the stilllimited supply of Canadian sperm for donation. Previous studies indicated the potentially altruistic intentions of most sperm donors and supported the implementation of the Assisted Human Reproduction Act 99 . However, a recent Canadian survey study (301 potential sperm donors) indicated that fewer than 1% of the men initially interested in donation would actually complete the process, the limiting factors being the lack of financial compensation and the need to meet Health Canada screening criteria 100 .…”

Who's keeping count? The need for regulation is a relative matter

“…For example, ART regulation that specifically relates to restrictions on eligibility criteria, such as in countries that do not make ART available to single women or lesbian couples, can lead to reproductive tourism (1,(34)(35)(36). In addition, regulation regarding the revocation of donor anonymity in DI (2,4,(36)(37)(38) can lead to a reduction in available donors (1,4,12,16,39). In countries where both or either of these regulations are in place, they are designed, in part, to safeguard the rights and welfare of the DI child (4,(40)(41)(42).…”

“…In countries where both or either of these regulations are in place, they are designed, in part, to safeguard the rights and welfare of the DI child (4,(40)(41)(42). These regulations can, on the other hand, potentially disadvantage the clinics and gamete providers (4,39), and possibly the potential parents, if they are not eligible for DI treatment or have to wait for a donor to become available (11,16,43). The eligibility issue is not relevant to the Unites States, however, and approximately 50% of DI customers are currently single women or lesbian couples (4).…”