Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nr4z6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T13:28:32.028Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

14 - ‘Choosing’ a donor

Parents’ perspectives on current and future donor information provision in clinically assisted reproduction

from Part IV - Information about donors

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 March 2016

By
Sophie Zadeh ,
Susan Imrie  and
Andrea M. Braverman
Edited by
Susan Golombok ,
Rosamund Scott ,
John B. Appleby ,
Martin Richards  and
Stephen Wilkinson
Susan Golombok
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Rosamund Scott
Affiliation:
King's College London
John B. Appleby
Affiliation:
King's College London
Martin Richards
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Stephen Wilkinson
Affiliation:
Lancaster University
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Regulating Reproductive Donation , pp. 311 - 333
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Almeling, R. (2011). Sex Cells: The Medical Market for Eggs and Sperm. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, G. (2000). The Elusive Embryo: How Women and Men Approach New Reproductive Technologies. London: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, G., Butler, A. and Nachtigall, R.D. (2005). ‘Resemblance talk: a challenge for parents whose children were conceived with donor gametes in the US’. Social Science and Medicine, 61, 1300–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bielawska-Batorowicz, E. (1994). ‘Artificial insemination by donor – an investigation of recipient couples’ viewpoints’. Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 12, 123–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blake, L., Zadeh, S., Statham, H. and Freeman, T. (2014). ‘Families created by assisted reproduction: children's perspectives’, in Freeman, T., Graham, S., Ebtehaj, F. and Richards, M. (eds.), Relatedness in Assisted Reproduction: Families, Origins and Identities. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Blyth, E., Langridge, D. and Harris, R. (2010). ‘Family building in donor conception: parents’ experiences of sharing information’. Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 28, 116–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blyth, E., Kramer, W. and Schneider, J. (2013). ‘Perspectives, experiences, and choices of parents of children conceived following oocyte donation’. Reproductive Biomedicine Online, 26, 179–88.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boulos, M., Kerridge, I. and Waldby, C. (2010). `Reciprocity in the donation of reproductive oocytes’, in Nash, M. (ed.), Reframing Reproduction: Conceiving Gendered Experiences. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Braverman, A.M., Taylor, D., Galen, B., Nicholson, R. and Scott, R.T. (2010). ‘Does mental health and nursing counselling influence ovum donor recipients’ preferences for their donors?’ Fertility and Sterility, 94, S67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braverman, A.M., Galen, B., Taylor, D. and Scott, R.T. (2011). ‘Do ovum donor recipient preferences change over time?’ Fertility and Sterility, 96, S10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brewaeys, M., de Bruyn, J.K., Louwe, L.A. and Helmerhorst, F.M. (2005). ‘Anonymous or identity-registered sperm donors? A study of Dutch recipients’ choices’. Human Reproduction, 20, 820–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broderick, P. and Walker, I. (1995). ‘Information access and donated gametes: how much do we know about who wants to know?’ Human Reproduction, 10, 3338–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bujan, L., Le Lannou, D. and Kunstmann, J-M. (2012). ‘Anonymat du don de gamètes’. Gynécologie Obstétrique & Fertilité, 40, 8–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chabot, J.M. and Ames, B.D. (2004). ‘It wasn't “let's get pregnant and go do it”: decision making in lesbian couples planning motherhood via donor insemination’. Family Relations, 53, 348–56Google Scholar
Culley, L., Hudson, N., Rapport, F., Blyth, E., Norton, W. and Pacey, A.A. (2011). ‘Crossing borders for fertility treatment: motivations, destinations and outcomes of UK fertility travellers’. Human Reproduction, 26, 2373–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ehrensaft, D. (2008). ‘Just Molly and me, and donor makes three: lesbian motherhood in the age of assisted reproductive technology’. Journal of Lesbian Studies, 12, 161–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Flores, H., Lee, J., Rodriguez-Purata, J., Witkin, G. et al. (2014). ‘Beauty, brains or health: trends in ovum recipient preferences’. Journal of Women's Health, 23, 830–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Freeman, T., Jadva, V., Kramer, W. and Golombok, S. (2009). ‘Gamete donation: parents’ experiences of searching for their child's donor siblings and donor’. Human Reproduction, 24, 505–16.Google ScholarPubMed
Godman, K.M., Sanders, K., Rosenberg, M. and Burton, P. (2006). ‘Potential sperm donors’, recipients’ and their partners’ opinions towards the release of identifying information in Western Australia’. Human Reproduction, 21, 3022–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Graham, S. (2014). ‘Stories of an absent “father”: Single women negotiating relatedness through donor profiles’, in Freeman, T., Graham, S., Ebtehaj, F. and Richards, M. (eds.), Relatedness in Assisted Reproduction: Families, Origins and Identities. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Greenfeld, D. and Klock, S.C. (2004). ‘Disclosure decisions among known and anonymous oocyte donation recipients’. Fertility and Sterility, 81, 1565–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hershberger, P.E. (2007). ‘Pregnant, donor oocyte recipient women describe their lived experience of establishing the “family lexicon”’, Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic and Neonatal Nursing, 18, 1–7.Google Scholar
Hertz, R. (2006). Single by Chance, Mothers by Choice. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
HFEA Code of Practice, 8th edn (2013). Available at www.hfea.gov.uk/docs/Code_of_Practice_8_-_October_2013.pdf. Accessed 28 February 2014.Google Scholar
Hudson, N. and Culley, L. (2014). ‘Beginnings and belonging: third party assisted conception, ethnicity and relatedness in British South Asian communities’, in Freeman, T., Graham, S., Ebtehaj, F. and Richards, M. (eds.), Relatedness in Assisted Reproduction: Families, Origins and Identities. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jackson, M. (1957). ‘Artificial insemination (donor)’. The Eugenics Review, 48, 203–9.Google ScholarPubMed
Johnson, K.M. (2013). ‘Making families: Organizational boundary work in US egg and sperm donation’. Social Science and Medicine, 99, 64–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, L., Bourne, K. and Hammarberg, K. (2012). ‘Donor conception legislation in Victoria, Australia: the “Time to Tell” campaign, donor-linking and implications for clinical practice’. Journal of Law and Medicine, 19, 803–19.Google ScholarPubMed
Kalampalikis, N., Haas, V., Fieulaine, N., Doumergue, M. and Deschamps, G. (2012). ‘Giving or giving back: New psychosocial insights from sperm donors in France’. Psychology, Health and Medicine, 1–9.Google ScholarPubMed
Klock, S.C. and Greenfeld, D.A. (2004). ‘Parents’ knowledge about the donors and their attitudes toward disclosure in oocyte donation’. Human Reproduction, 19, 1575–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lev, A.I. (2006). ‘Gay dads: Choosing surrogacy’. Lesbian and Gay Psychology Review, 7, 72–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindheim, S.R. and Sauer, M.V. (1998). ‘Expectations of recipient couples awaiting an anonymous oocyte donor match’. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics, 15, 444–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mamo, L. (2005). ‘Biomedicalizing kinship: Sperm banks and the creation of affinity-ties’. Science as Culture, 14, 237–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nordqvist, P. (2012). ‘“I don't want us to stand out more than we already do”: Lesbian couples negotiating family connections in donor conception’. Sexualities, 15, 644–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nuffield Council on Bioethics (2013). Donor Conception: Ethical Aspects of Information Sharing. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics.Google Scholar
Pennings, G. (2000). ‘The right to choose your donor: a step towards commercialisation or a step towards empowering the patient?’ Human Reproduction, 15, 508–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Quiroga, S.S. (2007). ‘Blood is thicker than water: policing donor information and the reproduction of whiteness’. Hypatia, 22, 143–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodino, I.S., Burton, P.J. and Sanders, K.A. (2011a). ‘Donor information considered important to donors, recipients and offspring: an Australian perspective’. Reproductive Biomedicine Online, 22, 303–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rodino, I.S., Burton, P.J. and Sanders, K.A. (2011b). ‘Mating by proxy: a novel perspective to donor conception’. Fertility and Sterility, 96, 998–1001.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scheib, J.S., Riordan, M. and Rubin, S. (2003). ‘Choosing identity-release sperm donors: The parents’ perspective 13–18 years later’. Human Reproduction, 18, 1115–27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scheib, J.E. and Cushing, R.A. (2007). ‘Open-identity donor insemination in the United States: Is it on the rise?’ Fertility and Sterility, 88, 231–2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Söderström-Anttila, V., Sajaniemi, N., Tiitinen, A. and Hovatta, O. (1998). ‘Health and development of children born after oocyte donation compared with that of those born after in-vitro fertilization, and parents’ attitudes regarding secrecy’. Human Reproduction, 13, 2009–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Söderström-Anttila, V., Sälevaara, M. and Suikkari, A.M. (2010). Increasing openness in oocyte donation families regarding disclosure over 15 years. Human Reproduction, 25, 2535–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stuart-Smith, S.J., Smith, J.A. and Scott, E.J. (2012). ‘To know or not to know Dilemmas for women receiving unknown oocyte donation. Human Reproduction, 27, 2067–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
The Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (2013). ‘Informing offspring of their conception by gamete or embryo donation: a committee opinion’. Fertility and Sterility, 100, 45–9.Google Scholar
Van Berkel, D., van der Veen, L., Kimmel, I. and te Velde, E. (1999). ‘Differences in the attitudes of couples whose children were conceived through artificial insemination by donor in 1980 and in 1996’. Fertility and Sterility, 71, 226–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zadeh, S., Freeman, T. and Golombok, S. (2013). ‘Ambivalent identities of single women using sperm donation’. Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale / International Review of Social Psychology, 26, 97–123.Google Scholar

Legislation

Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act (1990), as amended (2008).Google Scholar
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act (1990), as amended (2008).Google Scholar

UK

Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act (1990), as amended (2008).Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×