Information on genetic origins in donor-assisted conception: Is knowing who you are a human rights issue?

References

• Abdalla H, Shenfield F, Latarche E. Statutory information for the children born of oocyte donation in the UK: what will they be told in 2008?. Human Reproduction 1998; 13: 1106–1109
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• How it feels to be a child of donor insemination?. British Medical Journal 2002; 324: 797–797, dAnonymous, (http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/324/7340/797/DI1 — accessed 8 April 2002)
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ashenden H. Who to tell, when to tell. DC Network News 2000; 16: 4–4
   Google Scholar
• Baran A, Pannor R. Lethal Secrets: The Psychology of Donor Insemination. Amistad Publications, New York 1993
   Google Scholar
• Blyth E. Donor-assisted conception and donor offspring rights to genetic origins information. International Journal of Children's Rights 1998; 6: 237–253
   Google Scholar
• Blyth E. Guidance for egg sharing arrangements: redefining the limits of information-giving in donor-assisted conception. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 2001; 3(1)45–47, (www.rbmonline.com/4DCGI/Article/Detail?38%091%09=%20148%09) Webpaper 2001/148
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Blyth E, Hunt J. Sharing genetic origins information in donor assisted conception: views from licensed centres on HFEA Donor Information Form (91) 4. Human Reproduction 1998; 13: 3274–3277
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brewaeys A. Donor insemination: the impact on family and child development. Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics and Gynecology 1996; 17: 1–13
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brewaeys A, Golombok S, Naaktgeboren N, de Bruyn JK, van Hall EV. Donor insemination: Dutch parents' opinions about confidentiality and donor anonymity and the emotional adjustment of their children. Human Reproduction 1997; 12: 1591–1597
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Broderick P, Walker I. Information access and donated gametes: how much do we know about who wants to know?. Human Reproduction 1995; 10: 3338–3341
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Children's Society. British Public Back Change in Law to Give Children a Right to Their Identity. Children's Society, London 2002
   Google Scholar
• Clark S. Who to tell, how to tell. DC Network News 2000; 16: 5–5
   Google Scholar
• Cook R, Golombok S, Bish A, Murray C. Disclosure of donor insemination: parental attitudes. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 1995; 65: 549–559
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cordray AW. A survey of people conceived through donor insemination. DI Network News 1999–2000; 14: 4–5
   Google Scholar
• Council of Europe. European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Council of Europe, Strasbourg 1950
   Google Scholar
• Council of Europe. Human Artificial Procreation. Council of Europe, Strasbourg 1989
   Google Scholar
• Council of Europe. Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with Regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine. Council of Europe, Strasbourg 1996
   Google Scholar
• Daniels K. The Swedish Insemination Act and its impact. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1994; 34: 437–439
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daniels K. The semen providers. Donor Insemination: International Social Science Perspectives, K Daniels, E Haimes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1998; 76–104, In
   Google Scholar
• Daniels K. Policy and legal issues in assisted human reproduction. Loccumer Protokolle, S Tritsch-Opperman, 1999; 58/98: 57–70, In
   Google Scholar
• Daniels K, Lalos O. The Swedish Insemination Act and the availability of donors. Human Reproduction 1995; 10: 1871–1874
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deech R. Family law and genetics. Modern Law Review 1998; 61: 697–715
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Deech R. Recruitment of sperm donors and calculating the maximum number of children that may be born per donor. Letter to Persons Responsible in licensed treatment centres CH(00)11. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, London November, 2000, 8
   Google Scholar
• Department of Health. Donor information consultation: providing information about gamete or embryo donors. Department of Health, London 2001
   Google Scholar
• Department of Health and Social Security. Report of the Committee of Inquiry into Human Fertilisation and Embryology (The Warnock Report). HMSO, London 1984, Cmnd. 9414.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Health and Social Security. Human Fertilisation and Embryology: A Framework for Legislation. HMSO, London 1987, Cm. 259.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Health, Welsh Office, Home Office and Lord Chancellor's Department. Adoption: The Future. HMSO, London 1993, Cm 2288.
   Google Scholar
• DI Network. DI Network position on anonymity. DI Network News 1999/2000; 14: 1–2
   Google Scholar
• Donor Conception Network. Response to the BFS Recommendations for Good Practice on the Screening of Egg and Embryo Donors. Human Fertility 2001; 4: 49–50
   Google Scholar
• Donor Conception Support Group of Australia Inc. Let the Offspring Speak: Discussions on Donor Conception. Donor Conception Support Group of Australia Inc., Georges Hall, New South Wales 1997
   Google Scholar
• Douglas G, Lavery R, Plumtree A. Truth and the child: the legal perspective. Truth and the Child Ten Years On: Information Exchange in Donor Assisted Conception, E Blyth, M Crawshaw, J Speirs. British Association of Social Workers, Birmingham 1998; 9–13, In
   Google Scholar
• Engel E. Tracing half-siblings from the same donor: the issues for counsellors. Journal of Fertility Counselling 2001; 8: 15–17
   Google Scholar
• Festing S. Brothers and sisters have I many. DI Network News 1999–2000; 14: 5–5
   Google Scholar
• Franz, S, Allen, D. Report to Health Canada on The Offspring speak — An International Conference of Donor Offspring. Infertility Network, Toronto August, 2001, 12, 2000
   Google Scholar
• Freeman M. The new birth right? Identity and the child of the reproduction revolution. International Journal of Children's Rights 1996; 4: 273–297
   Google Scholar
• Gaskin versus UK (Access to Personal Files). EHRR. 1989; 12: 36–36
   Google Scholar
• Gollancz D. Donor insemination: a question of rights. Human Fertility 2001; 4: 164–167
   Google Scholar
• Golombok S, Brewaeys A, Cook R, Giavazzi M, Guerra D, Mantoyani A, van Hall E, Crosignani P, Dexeus S. The European study of assisted conception families: family functioning and child development. Human Reproduction 1996; 11: 2324–2331
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• , Gottlieb C (2001) Donor insemination in Sweden — will the child know about it?. http://www.ferti.net/fertimagazine/interview/2001_12_01.asp. (Accessed 10 January 2002)
   Google Scholar
• Gottlieb C, Lalos O, Lindblad F. Disclosure of donor insemination to the child: the impact of Swedish legislation on couples' attitudes. Human Reproduction 2000; 15: 2052–2056
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamilton R. Donor-conceived adults challenge the ethics of anonymity. Journal of Fertility Counselling 2002; 9: 33–34
   Google Scholar
• Hewitt G. Missing Links. Unpublished Personal Interest Project. East Hills Girls Technology High School, Sydney 2001
   Google Scholar
• Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. Annual Report. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, London 2000
   Google Scholar
• Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. Code of Practice5th Edn. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, London 2001
   Google Scholar
• Hunt J. Fertility Education in Schools Project. Journal of Fertility Counselling 2000; 7: 16–16
   Google Scholar
• Hunter M, Salter-Ling N, Glover L. Donor insemination: telling children about their origins. Child Psychology and Psychiatry Review 2000; 5: 157–163
   Google Scholar
• Jacobs, S. Conception of truth. Boston Globe. November, 2000, 29, F01
   Google Scholar
• Jonsson L. Artificial Insemination in Sweden. Gouvernement du Québec, Sortir la Maternité du Laboratoire. Conseil du Statut de la Femme, Québec 1988, In
   Google Scholar
• Lasker J, Borg S. In Search of Parenthood: Coping with Infertility and High-Tech Conception. Pandora Press, London 1989
   Google Scholar
• Lindblad F, Gottlieb S, Lalos O. Donor insemination and parental attitudes to disclosure. Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics and Gynecology 2000; 21: 193–203
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maclean S, Maclean M. Keeping secrets in assisted reproduction — the tension between donor anonymity and the need of the child for information. Child and Family Law Quarterly 1996; 8: 243–251
   Google Scholar
• McWhinnie AM. Families Following Assisted Conception: What do we Tell our Child?. Department of Social Work, University of Dundee, Dundee 1996
   Google Scholar
• Montuschi O, Merricks W (2000) Why Children Need to Know. Presentation at PROGRESS/ESHRE Conference on Gamete Privacy: Should egg and sperm donors be anonymous?, London, December, 4
   Google Scholar
• Nielsen L. Procreative tourism, genetic testing and the law. Families across Frontiers, N Lowe, G Douglas. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, The Hague 1996; 831–848, In
   Google Scholar
• Novaes S. The medical management of donor insemination. Donor Insemination: International Social Science Perspectives, K Daniels, E Haimes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1998; 105–130, In
   Google Scholar
• Priday L. Open letter to the Minister for Public Health. Journal of Fertility Counselling 2000; 7: 25–26
   Google Scholar
• Primarolo, D. House of Commons Debates. June, 1990a, 20 col. 990
   Google Scholar
• Primarolo, D. House of Commons Debates. June, 1990b, 20, col. 989
   Google Scholar
• Purdie A, Peek J, Irwin R, Ellis J, Graham F, Fisher P. Identifiable semen donors — attitudes of donors and recipient couples. New Zealand Medical Journal 1992; 105: 27–28
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson JN, Forman RG, Clark AM, Egan DM, Chapman MG, Barlow DH. Attitudes of donors and recipients to gamete donation. Human Reproduction 1991; 6: 307–309
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rose J. Exploring the caves: reflections on the problems and ethics of being conceived from ‘donor˚s sperm. BA (Hons) dissertation. Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane 2001
   Google Scholar
• Rose and Another versus Secretary of State for Health and Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. 2002, EWHC 1593
   Google Scholar
• Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Donor Insemination. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, London 1987
   Google Scholar
• Rubin S. Reproductive options 1: a spermdonor baby grows up. The Technological Woman: Interfacing with Tomorrow, J Zimmerman. Praeger, New York 1983; 211–215, In
   Google Scholar
• Rumball A, Adair V. Telling the story: parents' scripts for donor offspring. Human Reproduction 1999; 14: 1392–1399
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheib J, Riordan M, Shaver P. Choosing between anonymous and identity-release sperm donors: recipient and donor characteristics. Reproductive Technologies 2000; 10: 50–58
   Google Scholar
• Shenfield F, Steele SJ. What are the effects of anonymity and secrecy on the welfare of the child in gamete donation?. Human Reproduction 1997; 12: 392–395
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snowden R, Snowden EM. The Gift of a Child: a Guide to Donor Insemination. University of Exeter Press, Exeter 1993
   Google Scholar
• Spencer LW. What is the Experience of Confronting the Reality of Being a Donor Offspring?. MA thesis. Center for Humanistic Studies, Detroit 2000
   Google Scholar
• Sperm Bank of California. Identity-release research. Newsletter 2001; vii(Fall)3–3
   Google Scholar
• Stationery Office. Convention on the Rights of the Child: Second Report to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child by the United Kingdom. The Stationery Office, London 1999
   Google Scholar
• Stevens B. Offspring. Barna-Alper Productions, Toronto 2001
   Google Scholar
• , Tizzard J (2001) What rights do people born of donor conception have? BioNews 089 8 January. http://www.progress.org.uk/News
   Google Scholar
• Triseliotis J. Identity Formation and the Adopted Person. Scottish Adoption Association. 1998, Series of Occasional Papers
   Google Scholar
• Triseliotis J. Identity formation and the adopted person revisited. The Dynamics of Adoption: Social and Personal Perspectives, J Katz, A Treacher. Jessica Kingsley Publishers, London 2000; 81–97, In
   Google Scholar
• Turner AJ, Coyle A. What does it mean to be a donor offspring? The identity experiences of adults conceived by donor insemination and the implications for counselling and therapy. Human Reproduction 2000; 15: 2041–2051
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner C. A call for openness in donor insemination. Politics and the Life Sciences 1993; 12: 197–199
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• United Nations. Convention on the Rights of the Child. HMSO, London 1989
   Google Scholar
• Vercollone CF, Moss H, Moss R. Helping the Stork: The Choices and Challenges of Donor Insemination. Macmillan, New York 1997
   Google Scholar
• Whipp C. The legacy of deceit: a donor offspring's perspective on secrecy in assisted conception. Truth and the Child 10 Years On: Information Exchange in Donor-assisted Conception, E Blyth, M Crawshaw, S Speirs. British Association of Social Workers, Birmingham 1998; 61–64, In
   Google Scholar
• , Whipp C (2000) Rejecting kin The Ottawa Citizen 17 October. http://www.ottawacitizen.com/letters/001017/4698360.html
   Google Scholar
• Winston R. This foolish threat to the gift of life. Daily Mail July, 1999; 10, 26
   Google Scholar