Skip Navigation


Hum. Reprod. Advance Access originally published online on December 8, 2005
Human Reproduction 2006 21(4):852-856; doi:10.1093/humrep/dei407
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
21/4/852    most recent
dei407v1
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 Janssens, P.M.W.
Right arrow Articles by Dunselman, G.A.J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Janssens, P.M.W.
Right arrow Articles by Dunselman, G.A.J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

OPINION

A new Dutch Law regulating provision of identifying information of donors to offspring: background, content and impact

P.M.W. Janssens1,6, A.H.M. Simons3, R.J. van Kooij4, E. Blokzijl2 and G.A.J. Dunselman5

1 Hospital Rijnstate, Alysis zorggroep, Department of Clinical Chemistry/Semenbank and 2 Department of Gynaecology, Postbus 9555, 6800TA Arnhem and 3 University Medical Centre Groningen, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Groningen, 4 Stichting Medisch Centrum voor Geboorteregeling, IVF-laboratory, Kort Rapenburg 1, Leiden and 5 Academic Hospital Maastricht, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Maastricht, The Netherlands

6 To whom correspondence should be addressed: E-mail: pjanssens{at}alysis.nl

In 2004 a law was introduced in The Netherlands, which gives offspring conceived by semen or oocyte donation the right to know the identity of the donor. The law also regulates the provision of other information concerning the donor to the offspring, their parents or their general practitioner. With the introduction of this law, a choice has been made in which the wish of offspring prevails above others involved. Donors can no longer claim absolute anonymity; they are anonymous at the time of donation, but if a child aged ≥16 years requests information the donor may now be traced. During 15 years of debate on the abolition of donor anonymity the number of donors decreased by >70% and the number of semen banks by 50%. We describe the debate which led to the law, the characteristics of the law itself and note some of the probable and possible consequences for donor offspring, parents, donors and semen banks.

Key words: donor anonymity/donor insemination/donor recruitment/legislation/The Netherlands


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
 Critical Social PolicyHome page
E. Blyth and L. Frith
The UK's gamete donor `crisis' - a critical analysis
Critical Social Policy, February 1, 2008; 28(1): 74 - 95.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
B. C. Heng
Independent counselling on embryo donation for infertility patients
Hum. Reprod., August 1, 2007; 22(8): 2346 - 2348.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
C. Wang, M.-Y. Tsai, M.-H. Lee, S.-Y. Huang, C.-H. Kao, H.-N. Ho, and C. K. Hsiao
Maximum number of live births per donor in artificial insemination
Hum. Reprod., May 1, 2007; 22(5): 1363 - 1372.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
M. Legge, R. Fitzgerald, and N. Frank
A retrospective study of New Zealand case law involving assisted reproduction technology and the social recognition of 'new' family
Hum. Reprod., January 1, 2007; 22(1): 17 - 25.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
K. M. Godman, K. Sanders, M. Rosenberg, and P. Burton
Potential sperm donors', recipients' and their partners' opinions towards the release of identifying information in Western Australia
Hum. Reprod., November 1, 2006; 21(11): 3022 - 3026.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
A. P. Ferraretti, G. Pennings, L. Gianaroli, and M. C. Magli
Semen donor recruitment in an oocyte donation programme
Hum. Reprod., October 1, 2006; 21(10): 2482 - 2485.
[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.