Book contents
- Regulating Reproductive Donation
- Regulating Reproductive Donation
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Editors, contributors and discussants
- Book part
- Introduction
- 1 The development of governance and regulation of donor conception in the UK
- Part I International, cross-border and global issues
- Part II How many children per donor?
- Part III Donors
- Part IV Information about donors
- 13 Thoughts and feelings about the donor
- 14 ‘Choosing’ a donor
- 15 Regulating the provision of donor information to donor-conceived children
- 16 The informational needs of prospective parents
- Index
- References
16 - The informational needs of prospective parents
An ethical perspective
from Part IV - Information about donors
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 March 2016
Book contents
- Regulating Reproductive Donation
- Regulating Reproductive Donation
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Editors, contributors and discussants
- Book part
- Introduction
- 1 The development of governance and regulation of donor conception in the UK
- Part I International, cross-border and global issues
- Part II How many children per donor?
- Part III Donors
- Part IV Information about donors
- 13 Thoughts and feelings about the donor
- 14 ‘Choosing’ a donor
- 15 Regulating the provision of donor information to donor-conceived children
- 16 The informational needs of prospective parents
- Index
- References
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.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Regulating Reproductive Donation , pp. 352 - 372Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2016
References
References
American Society for Reproductive Medicine Ethics Committee (ASRM) (2007). ‘Financial compensation of oocyte donors’. Fertility and Sterility, 88, 305–9.Google Scholar
American Society for Reproductive Medicine Ethics Committee (ASRM) (2013). ‘Informing offspring of their conception by gamete or embryo donation: a committee opinion’. Fertility and Sterility, 100, 45–9.Google Scholar
Bay, B., Larsen, P.B., Schiøler Kesmodel, U. and Ingerslev, H.J. (2014). ‘Danish sperm donors across three decades: motivations and attitudes’. Fertility and Sterility, 101, 252–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Butcher, F. (2012). Selling your eggs: an empirical study of young women's views on the ethics of financial compensation for egg donation. Unpublished dissertation. Brighton and Sussex Medical School, University of Sussex, UK.Google Scholar
Côté, S., Affdal, A.O., Kadoch, I.J., Hamet, P. and Ravitsky, V. (2014). ‘Posthumous reproduction with surplus in vitro fertilization embryos: a study exploring users' choices’. Fertility and Sterility, 102, 1410–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cribb, A. and Owens, J. (2010). ‘Whatever suits you: unpicking personalization for the NHS’. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 16, 310–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Furnham, A., Salem, N. and Lester, D. (2014). ‘Selecting egg and sperm donors: the role of age, social class, ethnicity, height and personality’. Psychology, 5, 220–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallagher, J. (2014). ‘UK national sperm bank opens for business’. BBC. Available at www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-29815524.Google Scholar
Harris, J. (2001). ‘One principle and three fallacies of disability studies’. Journal of Medical Ethics, 27, 383–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fertilisation, Human and Authority, Embryology (HFEA) (2014a). Lifecycle. Available at www.hfea.gov.uk/8350.html.Google Scholar
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) (2014b). ‘Chapter 13: Payment for donors’. Code of Practice, 8th edn. Available at www.hfea.gov.uk/500.html#guidanceSection4582.Google Scholar
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) (2014c). ‘Chapter 11: Donor recruitment, assessment, and screening’. Code of Practice, 8th edn. Available at www.hfea.gov.uk/498.html.Google Scholar
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) (2014d). ‘Principles’. Code of Practice, 8th edn. Available at www.hfea.gov.uk/184.html.Google Scholar
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) (2014e). ‘Using donated sperm in your treatment’. Available at www.hfea.gov.uk/79.html.Google Scholar
Jackson, E. (2013). ‘The internet is a dangerous wild west of DIY-assisted conception’. The Guardian, Monday 29 April.Google Scholar
Leather, S. (2003). ‘Urgent: posthumous conception – consent requirements for birth registration’. HFEA Chair's Letter, CH(03)06. 15 September. Available at www.hfea.gov.uk/2684.html.Google Scholar
Levine, A.D. (2010). ‘Self-regulation, compensation, and the ethical recruitment of oocyte donors’. Hastings Center Report, 40, 25–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lifecycle (2014). ‘Information for current egg and sperm donors’. Available at www.hfea.gov.uk/docs/Lifecycle_Info_for_current_egg_and_sperm_donors_v1.pdf.Google Scholar
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) (2013). ‘NICE guidance fertility: assessment and treatment for people with fertility problems’. NICE guidelines [CG156]. Available at www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg156.Google Scholar
Nuffield Council on Bioethics (2013). Donor Conception: Ethical Aspects of Information Sharing. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics.Google Scholar
Savulescu, J. (2001). ‘Procreative beneficence: why we should select the best children’. Bioethics, 15, 413–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Savulescu, J. and Kahane, G. (2009). ‘The moral obligation to create children with the best chance of the best life’. Bioethics, 23, 274–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williams, C., Ehrich, K., Farsides, B. and Scott, R. (2007). ‘Facilitating choice, framing choice: staff views on widening the scope of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis in the UK’. Social Science and Medicine, 65, 1094–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar