Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (8)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Landau, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Landau, R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction, Vol 13, 3268-3273, Copyright © 1998 by Oxford University Press

REVIEWS

The management of genetic origins: secrecy and openness in donor assisted conception in Israel and elsewhere

R Landau
Paul Baerwald School of Social Work, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel.

Donor assisted conception provides new opportunities for achieving parenthood but at the same time raises issues of secrecy, anonymity, and the management of the offspring's genetic origins. As with adoption, the child's right to a genetic identity is at stake. The first part of this paper examines bio-psychosocial evidence indicating that maintaining secrecy and anonymity regarding genetic parents may be detrimental to the well-being of the donor offspring, the donor, and the nurturing, social parents. The second part discusses different approaches to the disclosure of genetic origins. The third part presents the case of Israel, as reflected mainly in the Report of the Israeli Ministry of Justice (1994). The paper shows that the Committee, yielding to the medical profession in the country, preferred the interests of the adults involved in donor assisted conception to those of the offspring and made no sincere attempts to protect the child's basic right to genetic identity. In doing so, it turned its back on the well established policy of openness in the field of adoption and on the emerging trend to similar openness in donor assisted conception in other countries.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
S. Marina, R. Exposito, F. Marina, J. Nadal, M. Masramon, and A. Verges
Oocyte donor selection from 554 candidates
Hum. Reprod., November 1, 1999; 14(11): 2770 - 2776.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.