Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF )
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 arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (10)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Haimes, E.V.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Haimes, E.V.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction, Vol. 8, No. 9, pp. 1518-1520, 1993
© 1993 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology


research-article

Ethics and Society: Do clinicians benefit from gamete donor anonymity?

E.V. Haimes

Department of Social Policy, University of Newcastle upon Tyne Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU, UK

Two groups of participants are frequently omitted from discussions and studies of donor anonymity in assisted conception: the children conceived and the clinicians providing the service. Past secrecy explains the absence of the children's views, but the absence of a systematic consideration of the clinicians' views is more puzzling. Evidence from the history of donor insemination suggests that clinicians have supported keeping such practices secret, not just for the protection of donors, recipients and resultant children but also to protect their own position from the detailed scrutiny of others who had expressed doubts about the practice. However, the various important developments in both the practice and the regulation of assisted conception in the 1980s and the early 1990s may well have alleviated such earlier anxieties. None the less, a growing willingness by clinicans to consider greater openness in gamete donation may be counter-balanced by the nature of their relationship with recipients, the majority of whom still appear to favour secrecy, and by the wider cultural uncertainty about the physiological and symbolic importance of genetic relationships in the development of the individual. It is concluded therefore that future studies of donor anonymity should include clinicians, in order to explore these questions in detail.

Key words: anonymity/clinicians/donor/history


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]



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.