The Donor‐conceived Child's ‘Right to Personal Identity’: The Public Debate on Donor Anonymity in the United Kingdom

Turkmendag, Ilke

doi:10.1111/j.1467-6478.2012.00570.x

Cited by 37 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…He wrote unequivocally that ‘In fundamental human relationship terms the donor is their father. The donor, and legislators, should affirm that he is their father.’ Michael B's views are in direct contrast to arguments that the donation of gametes does not grant parental status (Turkmendag, 2012). A US lawyer has argued that careful distinctions have been made between disclosing information about their donors to donor-conceived people and recognizing donors as parents (Cahn, 2012).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Over the years, emphasis changed from protecting the recipient (heterosexual) couple and the man's masculinity to constructing as a moral question the donor-conceived person's right to knowledge of his or her genealogy (Turkmendag, 2012). There have long been calls from donor-conceived people to allow them to have access to their donors' identity, regardless of when donations were made or any guarantees or expectations of anonymity operating at the time (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Gamete donors' expectations and experiences of contact with their donor offspring

Kirkman

Bourne²,

Fisher

et al. 2014

Human Reproduction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

STUDY QUESTIONWhat are the expectations and experiences of anonymous gamete donors about contact with their donor offspring?SUMMARY ANSWERRather than consistently wanting to remain distant from their donor offspring, donors' expectations and experiences of contact with donor offspring ranged from none to a close personal relationship.WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADYDonor conception is part of assisted reproduction in many countries, but little is known about its continuing influence on gamete donors' lives.STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATIONA qualitative research model appropriate for understanding participants' views was employed; semi-structured interviews were conducted during January–March 2013.PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODSBefore 1998, gamete donors in Victoria, Australia, were subject to evolving legislation that allowed them to remain anonymous or (from 1988) to consent to the release of identifying information. An opportunity to increase knowledge of donors' expectations and experiences of contact with their donor offspring recently arose in Victoria when a recommendation was made to introduce mandatory identification of donors on request from their donor offspring, with retrospective effect. Pre-1998 donors were invited through an advertising campaign to be interviewed about their views, experiences and expectations; 36 sperm donors and 6 egg donors participated.MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCEThis research is unusual in achieving participation by donors who would not normally identify themselves to researchers or government inquiries. Qualitative thematic analysis revealed that most donors did not characterize themselves as parents of their donor offspring. Donors' expectations and experiences of contact with donor offspring ranged from none to a close personal relationship.LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTIONIt is not possible to establish whether participants were representative of all pre-1998 donors.WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGSAnonymous donors' needs and desires are not homogeneous; policy and practice should be sensitive and responsive to a wide range of circumstances and preferences. Decisions made to restrict or facilitate contact or the exchange of information have ramifications for donors as well as for donor-conceived people.STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)The study was funded by the Victorian Department of Health. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERNot applicable.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gamete donors' expectations and experiences of contact with their donor offspring

Kirkman

Bourne²,

Fisher

et al. 2014

Human Reproduction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the other hand, if it is felt that direct and thorough feedback on the genetic contribution of the donor to one's personality and capacities is required, this would again imply a rather intense comparison of characteristics and exchange of experiences for which openidentity policies give no guarantee. Moreover, if such information is thought to be crucial for discovering one's self and for assessing one's potential, access to donor information at age 18 comes rather late (Turkmendag 2012). For DC offspring who seek fuller background information about the donor, the question is not so much "who is my donor?"…”

Section: (1) To Avoid Medical Risks and Consanguineous Relationshipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Open-Identity Sperm Donation: How Does Offering Donor-Identifying Information Relate to Donor-Conceived Offspring’s Wishes and Needs?

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past years, a growing number of countries have legislated open-identity donation, in which donor-conceived offspring are given access to the donor's identity once the child has reached maturity. It is held that donor anonymity creates identity problems for such children similar to the "genealogical bewilderment" described within the adoption context. The study of the social and psychological effects of open-identity donation is still very much in its infancy, but what has been left unquestioned is whether (and to what extent) offering access to the donor's name and address is an adequate response to such effects. This study has two goals: First, we aim to provide a systematic review of the reasons why donor-conceived (DC) offspring want to know the identity of their sperm donor. Second, we examine to what extent the provision of donoridentifying information can satisfy the reasons mentioned. The most important motivations appear to be: (1) to avoid medical risks and consanguineous relationships; (2) to satisfy curiosity; (3) to learn more about the self or to complete one's identity; (4) to learn more about what kind of person the donor is (biographical information, why he donated, etc.); (5) to form a relationship with the donor and/or his family; and (6) to learn about one's ancestry/genealogy. Our analysis shows that for nearly all of these reasons access to the donor's identity is not necessary. In those cases where it is, moreover, donor identification is not sufficient. What is really needed is (extended) contact with the donor, rather than the mere provision of his name.

show abstract

“…Plusieurs logiques principales s'affrontent sur le plan éthique. Certains critiquent ainsi une levée de l'anonymat des donneurs de gamètes, au risque d'une biologisation de la filiation (voir par exemple Borrillo, 2010et Turkmendag, 2012. D'autres défendent au contraire une levée de l'anonymat du don, sous certaines conditions, au nom du droit de l'enfant à connaître ses origines et son histoire.…”

Section: Perspectives Bioéthiques Et Sociolégalesunclassified

Genre, parenté et techniques de reproduction assistée : bilan et perspectives après 30 ans de recherche

Courduriès

Herbrand

2014

efg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International audienceThis volume of Enfances Familles Générations (Childhood Families Generations) looks at the current issues raised by the advent and proliferation of assisted reproductive technologies with a particular focus on kinship and gender. In the contemporary globalised world, a range of reproductive possibilities are now available, many of which raise important socio-anthropological questions related to the balance of power inherent in such interactions, the different practices and regulations involved in the delivery of ART and the individual and cultural significance of these practices. These issues have generated a rich and extensive body of literature over the past thirty years, particularly in English language scholarship. This introductory paper provides a reminder of these debates and seeks to foster dialogue with respect to work across different displines, by underscoring their respective contributions, particularly those in English- and French-language literature. Beginning with the summarizing of the major issues and contributions stemming from ART studies with respect to gender and parenthood, we shall underline the issues that are yet to be resolved and that, in our opinion, warrant further investigation. The main line of our argument is that, based on available literature and on social science research, emphasis must be placed on gender as inextricably linked to the experience and the study of assisted reproductive technologies.Résumé Ce numéro d'Enfances Familles Générations propose de se pencher sur les problématiques actuelles soulevées par les techniques de reproduction assistée (TRA) au regard des questions de parenté et de genre. Si, dans un monde globalisé, diverses possibilités reproductives sont désormais accessibles, celles-ci soulèvent de nombreuses questions socioanthropologiques du point de vue des rapports de pouvoir qu'elles engendrent, des pratiques et des régulations parfois très différentes dont elles font l'objet, ainsi que des significations individuelles et culturelles qui leur sont attribuées. Ces questions ont donné lieu à une littérature riche et abondante au cours des trente dernières années, en particulier dans le monde anglo-saxon. Cet article introductif est ainsi l'occasion de faire dialoguer davantage, en soulignant leurs apports respectifs, des travaux relevant de traditions différentes, en particulier dans les mondes francophones et anglophones. À partir de ce bilan des questionnements majeurs qu'a suscités l'étude des TRA dans les domaines du genre et de la parenté, nous soulignons les enjeux qui restent en suspens et qui mériteraient selon nous de faire l'objet de plus amples investigations. Le fil conducteur de notre propos, sur la base de la littérature disponible et des enquêtes menées jusqu'ici en sciences sociales, est d'insister sur la dimension du genre comme inextricable de l'expérience et de l'étude des techniques de reproduction assistée

show abstract

The Donor‐conceived Child's ‘Right to Personal Identity’: The Public Debate on Donor Anonymity in the United Kingdom

Cited by 37 publications

References 10 publications

Gamete donors' expectations and experiences of contact with their donor offspring

Gamete donors' expectations and experiences of contact with their donor offspring

Open-Identity Sperm Donation: How Does Offering Donor-Identifying Information Relate to Donor-Conceived Offspring’s Wishes and Needs?

Genre, parenté et techniques de reproduction assistée : bilan et perspectives après 30 ans de recherche

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About