Sperm donor limits that control for the 'relative' risk associated with the use of open-identity donors

Human Reproduction

Volumn 25, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 1089-1096

  Sawyer, Neroli ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BALLARAT   (Australia)

Author keywords

Anonymous donor; Half sibling union; Open identity donor; Psycho social impact; Revocation of anonymity

Indexed keywords

ADOPTION; ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION; CONSANGUINITY; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; GENETIC DISORDER; GENETIC RISK; HUMAN; LAW; MEDICAL ETHICS; NOTE; OPEN IDENTITY DONOR; PROGENY; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY; SPERM DONOR;

EID: 77951094341     PISSN: 02681161     EISSN: 14602350     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deq038     Document Type: Note

References (58)

1. Amato P. Family processes in one-parent, stepparent, and intact families: the child's point of view. J Marriage Fam 1987;49:327-337.
2. Blyth E, Frith L. The UK's gamete 'crisis'\a critical analysis. Crit Soc Policy 2008;28:74-95.
3. Blyth E, Frith L. Donor-conceived people's access to genetic and biographical history: an analysis of provisions in different jurisdictions permitting disclosure of donor identity. Int J Law Policy Family 2009; 23:174-191.
4. Blyth E, Crawshaw M, Haase J, Speirs J. The implications of adoption for donor offspring following donor-assisted conception. Child Fam Soc Work 2001;6:295-304.
5. Blyth E, Frith L, Farrand A. Is it possible to recruit gamete donors who are both altruistic and identifiable? Fertil Steril 2005;84(Suppl 1):S21.
6. Brewaeys A. Donor insemination, the impact on family and child development. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol 1996;17:1-13.
7. Brewaeys A, Kristoffersen I, Steireghem AC, Devroey P. Children from anonymous donors: an inquiry into homosexual and heterosexual parents' attitudes. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol 1993;14:23-35.
8. Cahn NR. Necessary subjects: the need for a mandatory national donor gamete registry. DePaul J Health Care Law 2008. GWU Legal Studies Research Paper No.402 and GWU Law School Public Law Research Paper No. 402. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1120389.
9. Cahn N. Accidental incest: drawing the line\or the curtain?\For reproductive technology. Harvard J Law Gend 2009;32:59-108.
10. Crawshaw M. Lessons from a recent adoption study to identify some of the service needs of, and issues for, donor offspring wanting to know about their donors. Hum Fertil 2002;5:6-12.
11. Curie-Cohen M. The frequency of consanguineous matings due to multiple use of donors in artificial Insemination. Am J Hum Genet 1980; 32:589-600.
12. Daniels K. Is blood really thicker than water? Assisted reproduction and its impact on out thinking about family. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol 2005; 26:265-270.
13. Daniels K, Blyth E, Crawshaw M, Curson R. Short communication: previous semen donors and their views regarding the sharing of information with offspring. Hum Reprod 2005;20:1670-1675.
14. Danks DM. Genetic considerations. In: Wood C (ed). Artificial Insemination by Donor. Melbourne: Brown Prior Anderson, 1983, 94-102.
15. de Boer A, Oosterwijk JC, Rigters-Aris CAE. Determination of a maximum number of artificial inseminations by donor children per sperm donor. Fertil Steril 1995;63:419-421.
16. de Boer A, Oosterwijk JC, Rigters-Aris CAE. Response to Egeland. Fertil Steril 1997;67:1182-1183.
17. Dozier M, Rutter M. Challenges to the development of attachment relationships faced by young children in foster and adoptive care. In: Cassidy J, Shaver P (eds). Handbook of Attachment: Theory, Research, and Clinical applications, 2nd edn. New York, NY: Guilford Press, 2008.
18. Dutton GN. Risks of artificial insemination. Rapid Response to Tony Sheldon's: Children at risk after sperm donor develops late onset genetic disease. BMJ 324: 631. Available at http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/324/7338/ 631#20574
19. Eccleston J. The probability of a consanguineous marriage occurring is a result of artificial insemination. The Australian Mathematical Society Gazette 90, 1978, 91.
20. Egeland T. Opinion: excessive use of a single donor? And inadvertent consanguinity. Fertil Steril 1997;67:1181-1182.
21. Feeney JA, Passmore NL, Peterson CC. Adoption, attachment and relationship concerns: a study of adult adoptees. Pers Relatsh 2007; 14:129-147.
22. Frances V, Frances A. The incest taboo and family structure. Fam Process 1976;15:235-244.
23. Freeman T, Jadva V, Kramer W, Golombok S. Gamete donation: parent's experiences of searching for their child's donor siblings and donor. Hum Reprod 2009;24:505-516.
24. Frith L. Op-Ed: Gamete donation, identity, and the offspring's right to know. Virtual Mentor 2007;9:644-648.
25. Gebhardt DOE. Sperm donor suffers years later form inherited disease. J Med Ethics 2002;28:213-214.
26. Godman KM, Sanders K, Rosenberg M, Burton P. Potential sperm donors', recipients' and their partners' opinions towards the release of identifying information in Western Australia. Hum Reprod 2006; 21:3022-3026.
27. Golombok S, Brewaeys A, Giavazzi MT, Guerra D, MacCallum F, Rust J. The European study of assisted reproduction families: the transition to adolescence. Hum Reprod 2002;17:830-840.
28. Golombok S, Lycett E, MacCallum F, Jadva V, Murray C, Rust J, Abdalla H, Jenkins J, Margara R. Parenting infants conceived by gamete donation. J Fam Psychol 2004;18:443-452.
29. Grace V, Daniels K, Gillett W. The donor, the father, and the imaginary constitution of the family: parent's constructions in the case of donor insemination. Soc Sci Med 2008;66:301-314.
30. ITA News Release. Parents want to tell children about donor conception.. and children want to know. Infertility Treatment Authority, Melbourne, 2007. http://www.ita.org.au/.
31. Janssens MW. No reason for a reduction in the number of offspring per sperm donor because of possible transmission of autosomal dominant diseases. Hum Reprod 2003;18:669-671.
32. Janssens MW. Colouring the different phases in gamete and embryo donation. Hum Reprod 2009;24:502-504.
33. Janssens PMW, Simons AHM, van Kooij RJ, Blokzijl E, Dunselman GAJ. A new Dutch law regulating provision of identifying information of donors to offspring: background, content and impact. Hum Reprod 2006; 21:852-856.
34. Jones H, Cohen J, Cooke I, Kempers R. IFFS surveillance 2007. Fertil Steril 2007;87:S1-S67.
35. Kirkman M, Rosenthal D, Johnson L. Families working it out: adolescents' views on communicating about donor-assisted conception. Hum Reprod 2007;22:2318-2324.
36. KramerW.Redefining Family. vol 2007. The Donor Sibling Registry 2000. http://www.donorsiblingregistry.com/index.php (September 2007, date last accessed).
37. MacCallum F. Embryo donation parents' attitudes towards donors: comparison with adoption. Hum Reprod 2009; doi:10.1093/humrep/den386.
38. Magnuson K, Berger L. Family structure states and transitions: associations with children's well-being during middle childhood. J Marriage Fam 2009; 71:575-591.
39. Mahlstedt PP, LaBounty K, Kennedy WT. The views of adult offspring of sperm donation: essential feedback for the development of ethical guidelines within the practice of assisted reproductive technology in the United States. Fertil Steril 2009 (in press).
40. McDonough PG. Editorial comment: excessive use of a single donor? And inadvertent consanguinity. Fertil Steril 1997;67:1183-1185.
41. Miller C. Parenthood at any price. New Atlantis 2007;17:96-104.
42. Nachtigall RD, Tschann JM, Quiroga SS, Pitcher L, Becker G. Stigma, disclosure, and family functioning among parents of children conceived through donor insemination. Fertil Steril 1997;68:83-89.
43. Pennings G. International evolution of legislation and guidelines in medically assisted reproduction. Reprod Biomed Online 2009;18:15-18.
44. Petersen K, Baker HW, Pitts M, Thorpe R. Assisted reproductive technologies: professional and legal restrictions in Australian clinics. J Law Med 2005;12:373-385.
45. Rose J. Sperm donation: the mediation of kinship and identity issues for the offspring 2nd National Conference on the Mental Health Aspects of Person Affected by Family Separation. The Park Centre for Mental Health, Brisbane, Australia, 2004.
46. Sawyer N. Removing the 'relative' uncertainty within the Australian donor insemination network. J Law Med 2009a;17:270-279.
47. Sawyer N. Who's keeping count? The need for regulation is a relative matter. Fertil Steril 2009b;92:1811-1817.
48. Sawyer N, McDonald J. A review of mathematical models used to determine sperm donor limits for infertility treatment. Fertil Steril 2008;90:265-271.
49. Scheib JE, Ruby A. Contact among families who share the same sperm donor. Fertil Steril 2008;90:33-43.
50. Scheib JE, Ruby A. Beyond consanguinity risk: developing donor birth limits that consider psychosocial risk factors. Fertil Steril 2009;91:e12.
51. Scheib JE, Riordan M, Rubin S. Adolescents with open-identity sperm donors: report from 12-17 year olds. Hum Reprod 2005; 20:239-252.
52. Sheldon T. Children at risk after sperm donor develops late onset genetic disease. Br Med J 2002;324:631.
53. Shenfield F, Steele SJ. A gift is a gift, or why gamete donors should not be paid. Hum Reprod 1995;10:253-255.
54. Shenfield F, Steele SJ. What are the effects of anonymity and secrecy on the welfare of the child in gamete donation. Hum Reprod 1997; 12:392-395.
55. Speirs J. Identifiable gamete donors: the New Zealand model. J Fertil Couns 1998;5:22-24.
56. Sylvester T, Burt R. The Case Against Sperm Donor Anonymity. New Haven, CT: Yale Law School, 2007. http://www.donorsiblingregistry. com/.
57. Thorn P, Katzorke T, Daniels K. Semen donors in Germany: a study exploring motivations and attitudes. Hum Reprod 2008;23:2415-2420.
58. Wang C, Tsai M-Y, Lee M-H, Huang S-Y, Kao C-H, Ho H-N, Hsiao CK. Maximum number of live births per donor in artificial insemination. Hum Reprod 2007;22:1363-1372.