
This paper presents the case for a change from the current practice of anonymity and secrecy in the use of donated gametes in medically assisted conception. It does so by describing history of the practice, various committees of enquiry over the years, their recommendations for consideration of the children created and the need for follow-up of the outcome; presenting the evidence from outcome studies both about child development and family relationships where secrecy is maintained about the child's origin and those where the practice is openly to acknowledge their origins. This is followed by an analysis of the experience and views of these children once they are adults. In discussion of the composite findings recurring themes emerge. From this it is concluded that offspring from donated gametes should not continue to be denied knowledge of their origins and antecedents. In the public debate, four schools of thought are identified. Possible practical scenarios to implement change are discussed. This paper argues that the fundamental issue regarding any of these remains-that priority in decision-making should be the lifelong well-being of the children being created.
Adult, Male, Oocyte Donation, Genetic Diseases, Inborn, Tissue Donors, Child Development, Reproductive Techniques, Genetics, Humans, Insemination, Artificial, Heterologous, Female, Family Relations, Child, Confidentiality
Adult, Male, Oocyte Donation, Genetic Diseases, Inborn, Tissue Donors, Child Development, Reproductive Techniques, Genetics, Humans, Insemination, Artificial, Heterologous, Female, Family Relations, Child, Confidentiality
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 90 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 1% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
