Should IVF guidelines be relaxed in the UK?

References

• McLaren A. IVF: regulation or prohibition? Nature332(30), 469–480 (1989).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jasanoff S. Designs on Nature. Princeton University Press, NJ, USA, 26 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Warnock M. Moral thinking and government policy: the warnock committee on human embryology. Milbank Mem. Fund. Q Health Soc.63(3), 504–522 (1985).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Warnock M. Report of the Inquiry into Human Fertilisation and Embryology Cm 9314. Department of Health and Social Security, London, UK (1984).
   Google Scholar
• O’Brien Steinfels M. In vitro fertilization: ‘ethically acceptable’ research. Hastings Center Rep.9(3), 5–8 (1979).
   Google Scholar
• Kolata G. In vitro fertilization: is it safe and repeatable? Science201(4357), 698 (1978).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kass L. The wisdom of repugnance. In: The Ethics of Human Cloning. Kass L, Wilson JQ (Eds). American Enterprise Institute Press, DC, USA, 3–61 (1998).
   Google Scholar
• Leunens L, Celestin-Westreich S, Bonduelle M, Liebaers I, Ponjaert-Kristoffersen I. Follow-up of cognitive and motor development of 10-year-old singleton children born after ICSI compared with spontaneously conceived children. Hum. Reprod. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dem257 (2008) (Epub ahead of print).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steel AJ, Sutcliffe A. Long-term health implications for children conceived by IVF/ICSI. Hum. Fertil.12(1), 21–27 (2009).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ceelen M, van Weissenbruch M, Vermeiden JP, van Leeuwen FE, Delemarre-van de Waal HA. Pubertal development in children and adolescents born after IVF and spontaneous conception. Hum. Reprod.23(12), 2791–2798 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheldon S. Fragmenting fatherhood: the regulation of reproductive technologies. Modern Law Rev.68(4), 523–553 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Cohen CB. Parents anonymous. In: New Ways of Making Babies: The Case of Egg Donation. Cohen CB (Ed.). Indiana University Press, IN, USA (1996).
   Google Scholar
• Woodward BJ, Norton WJ. Lesbian intra-partner oocyte donation: a possible shake-up in the Garden of Eden? Hum. Fertil.9(4), 217–222 (2006).
   Google Scholar
• Warnock M. A Question of Life. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, UK, 18 (1985).
   Google Scholar
• Chan CCW, Ho PC. Infertility, assisted reproduction and rights. Best Prac. Res. Clin. Obstet. Gynaecol.20(3), 369–380 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riley L. Equality of access to NHS-funded IVF treatment in England and Wales. In: Human Fertilisation and Embryology: Reproducing Regulation. Horsey K, Biggs H (Eds). Routledge-Cavendish, KT, USA, 88 (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Lycett E, Daniels K, Curson R, Golombok S. Offspring created as a result of donor insemination: a study of family relationship, child adjustment, and disclosure. Fertil. Steril.82(1), 172–179 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stanton F, Golombok S. Maternal–fetal attachment during pregnancy following in vitro fertilisation. J. Psychosomatic Obstet. Gynaecol.14, 153–158 (1993).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Golombok S, Brewaeys A, Cook R et al. The European Study of Assisted Reproduction Families. Hum. Reprod.11(10), 2324–2331 (1996).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Golombok S, Murray C, Jadva V, Lycett E, MacCallum F, Rust J. Non-genetic and non-gestational parenthood: consequences for parent–child relationships and the psychological well-being of mothers, fathers and children at age 3. Hum. Reprod.21(7), 1918–1924 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bennett R, Harris J. Restoring natural function: access to infertility treatment using donated gametes. Hum. Fertil.2(1), 18–21 (1999).
   Google Scholar
• Fertility: Assessment and Treatment for People with Fertility Problems. National Collaborating Centre for Women’s and Children’s Health. Commissioned by the NICE. RCOG Press, London, UK (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Novaes SB. The medical management of donor insemination. In: Donor Insemination: International Social Science Perspectives. Danies K, Haimes E (Eds). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 105–130 (1998).
   Google Scholar
• Oakley A. Technologies of procreation. In: Essays on Women, Medicine and Health. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, UK, 177 (1993).
   Google Scholar
• Habbema JDF. Towards less confusing terminology in reproductive medicine: a proposal. Fertil. Steril.82(1), 36–40 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smajdor A. The changing face of IVF regulation. Expert Rev. Obstet. Gynecol.3(4), 433–436 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• PCT Survey – Provision of IVF in England 2007. Department of Health Report, London, UK (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Templeton A, Morris JK, Parslow W. Factors that affect outcome of in vitro fertilisation treatment. Lancet348, 1402–1406 (1996).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ashcroft R. Fair rationing is essentially local: an argument for postcode prescribing. Health Care Anal.14(3), 135–144 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nagy ZP, Chang C. Current advances in artificial gametes. Reprod. Biomed. Online11(3), 332–339 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newson AJ, Smajdor AC. Artificial gametes: new paths to parenthood? J. Med. Ethics31, 184–186 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HFEA Scientific and Clinical Advances Group. Horizon Scanning Briefing: In Vitro Derived Gametes. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, London, UK (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Testa G, Harris J. Ethics and synthetic gametes. Bioethics19(2), 146–166 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar