Skip Navigation


Hum. Reprod. Advance Access originally published online on March 8, 2007
Human Reproduction 2007 22(5):1210-1213; doi:10.1093/humrep/dem025
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
22/5/1210    most recent
dem025v1
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 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 arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Devroey, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Devroey, P.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2007. 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

ESHRE Task Force on Ethics and Law 12: Oocyte donation for non-reproductive purposes

ESHRE Task Force on Ethics and Law including, G. Pennings1, G. de Wert, F. Shenfield, J. Cohen, B. Tarlatzis and P. Devroey

1 To whom correspondence should be addressed at: Department of Philosophy and Moral Science, Ghent University, Blandijnberg 2, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium. E-mail: guido.pennings{at}ugent.be

The present paper focuses on oocyte donation for non-reproductive purposes, i.e. research and future therapy. The general principles of research ethics apply to these interventions. The proportionality principle demands that any possible harms to the oocyte donors should be proportionate to the possible benefits for society. The non-maleficence principle states that every reasonable effort should be made to minimize risks for donors. The position is adopted that, mutatis mutandis, women who donate oocytes for research should be treated similarly to research participants in clinical trials. This implies, among other things, that oocyte donors for research should receive reimbursement for all costs of the procedure and should get compensation for the time lost and inconvenience suffered during the treatment. In order to avoid malpractice and exploitation of poor women, a number of measures are proposed such as a ban on the import of oocytes.

Key words: oocyte donation/proportionality/reimbursement/research participants/safety

Submitted on December 4, 2006; accepted on December 12, 2006.


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 Reprod UpdateHome page
A.L. Bredenoord, G. Pennings, and G. de Wert
Ooplasmic and nuclear transfer to prevent mitochondrial DNA disorders: conceptual and normative issues
Hum. Reprod. Update, November 1, 2008; 14(6): 669 - 678.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
G. Pennings and W. Ombelet
Coming soon to your clinic: patient-friendly ART
Hum. Reprod., August 1, 2007; 22(8): 2075 - 2079.
[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.