Medicine, health care, and philosophy, 2013
Abstract
In France, since the approval of the first bioethics laws in 1994, the principle of the anonymity of sperm donors has prevailed. This choice is regularly challenged, namely by children who have been conceived under these conditions and have now reached adulthood. In this paper, we will briefly describe the reasons that led practitioners of assisted reproduction to endorse the anonymity principle in 1994. Secondly, we will elaborate on the reasons why this principle is becoming so controversial today. Finally, we shall examine two possible outcomes of the debate, highlighting their respective legitimacy as well as their consequences, as far as the rights of children, the notion of the family, and medical practice are concerned.
Topics
Laurence Brunet, Jean-Marie Kunstmann
PMID 22930360 22930360 DOI 10.1007/s11019-012-9431-7 10.1007/s11019-012-9431-7 Brunet et al. 2013, Brunet 2013
Related articles
Reproductive Ethics · Third Party Reproduction
O-273 The experience of donor conceived people accessing donor identity
Lambert P, 2025 · Human Reproduction
Abstract With shifts in legislation, increasing use of direct-to-consumer DNA testing, and growing advocacy around the right to identity more and more donor conceived people are seeking and obtaining information about the genetic origins. The presentation explores the deeply personal and complex journey of donor conceived (DC) people who seek to find their biological donors. This presentation explores the nuanced experience of donor conceived people as they are navigating the process of discovering their donor identity. Drawing on recent research, clinical insights and first-hand accounts the presentation explores the motivation of DC people, their hopes and fears, their expectations and experiences of finding and contacting their donors and the diverse outcomes of such processes. The presentation examines common challenges such as navigating secrecy, boundary setting, impact on family dynamics and different donors’ responses and level of engagement. It also highlights the impact of the interactions between DC individuals and their donors, whether affirming, ambiguous or disappointing, on the individual sense of self and family dynamics. The presentation will also address the ethical and practical considerations for professionals working in reproductive medicine and / or mental health highlighting the importance and benefits of psychological support, intermediary services and peer support.
Reproductive Ethics · Third Party Reproduction
O-272 Telling and talking about donor conception within the families: How can professionals help?
Indekeu A, 2025 · Human Reproduction
Abstract The general point of view on disclosure of the donor conception to the offspring experienced a major change over the years. From the outset, non-disclosure was imposed by medical professionals. Decades of debates followed, discussing if disclosure or non-disclosure would be in the best interest of the donor-conceived person, before the recommendation to disclose the donor conception to the offspring was integrated in professional guidelines such as those of ASRM (2013) and ESHRE (2024). This change in view was supported by research findings showing that late disclosure (and often discovery) has a negative impact on the wellbeing of donor-conceived people, that early disclosure is not burdensome for donor-conceived children (moreover, it is preferred by donor-conceived people), and that early disclosure is associated with better well-being of donor-conceived people during adolescence. Moreover, societal changes, such as the technological development of direct-to-consumer-genetic testing, have made non-disclosure impossible. Lastly, the framing of disclosure as a question concerning ‘the best interest’ of donor-conceived people has been replaced by a framework that information about one’s origin concerns a fundamental human right. Not only did the recommendation regarding disclosure/non-disclosure changed, also the knowledge about disclosure increased. While initially disclosure was often approached as a dichotomous act, research findings showed that disclosure occurs much more in layers. Moreover, disclosure is not a one-off activity, but (as preferred by donor-conceived people themselves) an ongoing conversation over the family-life course, that continues when the child grows up. Besides, disclosure is not a unilateral process in which only parents take up an active role, but it is an interactive process in which parent and child co-create their family-story. Lastly, disclosure does not only concern the origins of the child, but it is also a family-building story, in which parents formed their family in a different way they initially imagined. In relation to the actual disclosure process, studies have shown that parental confidence is generally associated with disclosure and a lack of confidence (including uncertainty around the language to use, the best way and time to disclose, and finding the information difficult to share) is associated with non-disclosure. A recent literature review showed that many participants across studies reported feelings of being unprepared, isolation and anxiety around the disclosure decision and process, and express a desire for support. Parents would like to hear experiences from other parents and to have access to resources, such as storybooks and movies, and networking opportunities for the donor-conceived people as they might enhance feeling comfortable with the disclosure process. However, support and advice were not always provided. This presentation reviews the latest existing empirical data regarding the disclosure-process (factors that might influence the process, outcomes, experiences of parents and donor-conceived people) and will especially address how, psychosocial as well as medical, professionals can support families in their ongoing conversation about their family-building, pre-, during and post-treatment. Furthermore, challenges and limitations of offering ongoing support will be discussed as well, based on an inquiry conducted in 10 jurisdictions.
Reproductive Ethics · Third Party Reproduction
Defining embryo donation: an Ethics Committee opinion
Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Electronic address: asrm@asrm.org, 2023 · Fertility and sterility
Building families through the adoption of children has been supported by human society throughout history. The ethical appropriateness of patients donating embryos to other patients for family building, or for research, is well established and is affirmed by this Committee. The use of the term ''adoption'' for embryos is inaccurate and should be avoided. This document replaces the ASRM Ethics Committee statement by the same name, last published in 2016.
Donor Gametes and Surrogacy · Egg Donation
Egg donation in the age of vitrification: A study of egg providers' perceptions and experiences in the UK, Belgium and Spain
Lafuente-Funes S et al., 2023 · Sociology of health & illness
IVF treatment involving donated eggs increases yearly. Numerous technical and commercial transformations have reshaped how eggs are retrieved, stored and managed. A key transformation is vitrification; a 'fast freezing' method that allows efficient preservation of eggs, and therefore more flexibility in use, giving rise to new commercial possibilities. There has been limited focus on egg providers' experiences in the context of vitrification and related commercialisation. We report findings from a study in the UK, Spain and Belgium, where we interviewed 75 egg providers. Comparing experiences within different donation 'regimes' allows an exploration of how varying national practices and policies shape information-giving and women's experiences. In the UK, a system of 'informed gift-giving' was described, where egg providers saw their actions as not-for-profit and felt relatively well informed. In Belgium, the system was presented as 'trusted tissue exchange': with less information-giving than in the UK, but clinics were trusted to act responsibly. In Spain, a 'closed-door, market-driven' system was described, whereby egg providers received little information and expressed concerns about generation of excess profit. Our findings extend understandings of how egg donation is managed at the national level and how donation regimes produce specific experiences, expectations and subjectivities amongst tissue providers.