Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Access to genetic and birth origins information for people conceived following third party assisted conception in the United Kingdom

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

In the United Kingdom, four distinct time periods may be identified during which differentiated information about their genetic origins may be available to a donor-conceived person. In addition, an individual conceived as the result of a surrogacy arrangement and who is also subject to a subsequent Parental Order may access differentiated information relating to the surrogacy arrangement dependent on which of the UK nations the Parental Order was made in. This paper outlines the historical, legal and social context of these provisions and identifies continuing issues for debate and possible further regulatory and legislative reform.

Affiliations: 1: Professor of Social Work, University of Huddersfield, UK Visiting Professor of Social Work, National University of Singapore Adjunct Professor of Health Ethics, Tung Wah College, Hong Kong, email: e.d.blyth@hud.ac.uk

10.1163/157181812X608291
/content/journals/10.1163/157181812x608291
dcterms_title,pub_keyword,dcterms_description,pub_author
6
3
Loading
Loading

Full text loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/157181812x608291
Loading

Data & Media loading...

1. 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 Vol 13( 1998) 11061109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/13.4.1106
2. Adair V. , Purdie A. , "‘Donor insemination programmes with personal donors: Issues of secrecy’", Human Reproduction Vol 11( 1996) 25582563. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a019160
3. Blears H. , "Speech at HFEA Annual Conference", 28 January ( 2003). 
4. Blyth E. , "‘Section 30: The acceptable face of surrogacy?’", Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law Vol 4( 1993) 248260.
5. Blyth E. , "‘‘I wanted to be interesting. I wanted to be able to say “I’ve done something interesting with my life”’’: Interviews with surrogate mothers in Britain", Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology Vol 12( 1994) 189198. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02646839408408885
6. Blyth E. , "‘‘Not a primrose path’: Commissioning parents’ experiences of surrogacy arrangements in Britain’", Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology Vol 13( 3/4) ( 1995) 185196.
7. Blyth E. , "‘Parental orders and identity registration: One country three systems’", Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law Vol 32( 4) ( 2010) 345352. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09649069.2010.539353
8. Blyth E. , Crawshaw M. , van den Akker O. , "‘Disclosing donor information: A new code of silence?’", BioNews Vol 498( 2009) 9 March.
9. Blyth E. , Frith L. , "‘Donor-conceived people’s access to genetic and biographical history: An analysis of provisions in different jurisdictions permitting disclosure of donor identity’", International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family Vol 23( 2009) 192210. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/lawfam/ebp005
10. Blyth E. , Frith L. , Jones C. , et al, "‘The role of birth certificates in relation to access to biographical and genetic history in donor conception’", International Journal of Children's Rights Vol 17( 2) ( 2009) 207233. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157181808X389254
11. 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 Vol 13( 1998) 32743277. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/13.11.3274
12. Blyth E. , Ryll I. , "‘Why wouldn’t you tell? Telling donor-conceived children about their conception’", Health Ethics Today Vol 15( 1) ( 2005) 4.  
13. Brazier M. , Campbell A. , Golombok S. , Surrogacy. Review for Health Ministers of Current Arrangements for Payments and Regulation. Report of the Review Team Cm 4068. ( London: HMSO, 1998).
14. Brewaeys A. , "‘Donor insemination: The impact on family and child development’", Journal of Psychosomatic and Obstetric Gynaecology Vol 17( 1996) 113. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/01674829609025658
15. Brewaeys A. , "‘Parent-child relationships and child development in donor insemination families’", Human Reproduction Update Vol 7( 2001) 3846. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humupd/7.1.38
16. Brewaeys A. , Golombok S. , Naaktgeboren N. , et al, "‘Donor insemination: Dutch parents’ opinions about confidentiality and donor anonymity and the emotional adjustment of their children’", Human Reproduction Vol 12( 1997) 15911597. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/12.7.1591
17. Brewaeys A. , de Bruyn J. , Helmerhorst F.M. , "‘Dutch donor insemination practice in transition’", Human Reproduction Vol 8( Suppl 1) ( 2003) xviii.
18. Brewaeys A. , de Bruyn J. , Louwe L. , et al, "‘Anonymous or identity-registered sperm donors? A study of Dutch recipients’ choices’", Human Reproduction Vol 20( 2005) 820824. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deh708
19. British Medical Association, Changing Conceptions of Motherhood. The Practice of Surrogacy in Britain ( London: BMA Publications, 1996).
20. Cook R. , Golombok S. , Bish A. , et al, "‘Disclosure of donor insemination: Parental attitudes’", American Journal of Orthopsychiatry Vol 65( 1995) 549559. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0079674
21. Council of Europe, Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ( Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 1950).  
22. Crawshaw M. , Blyth E. , Daniels K. , "‘Past semen donors’ views about the use of a voluntary contact register’", Reproductive BioMedicine Online Vol 14( 4) ( 2007) 411417. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60886-3
23. Crawshaw M. , Marshall L. , "‘Practice experiences of running UK DonorLink, a voluntary information exchange and contact register for adults related through donor conception’", Human Fertility Vol 11( 4) ( 2008) 231237. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14647270801908228
24. Daniels K. , Blyth E. , Crawshaw M. , et al, "‘Previous semen donors and their views regarding the sharing of information with offspring’", Human Reproduction Vol 20( 2005) 16701675. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deh839
25. Department of Health, Providing Information about Sperm, Egg and Embryo Donors: Consultation Document ( London: Department of Health, 2001).  
26. Department of Health, Donor Information: Providing Information about Gamete or Embryo Donors: Responses to Consultation ( London: Department of Health, 2003).  
27. Department of Health, Review of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act A Public Consultation ( London: Department of Health, 2005).  
28. Department of Health, Responses to the Consultation on the Review of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act ( London: Department of Health, 2006a).
29. Department of Health, Review of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act: Proposals for Revised Legislation (Including Establishment of the Regulatory Authority for Tissue and Embryos) Cm 6989. ( London: Department of Health, 2006b).  
30. Department of Health, Government Response to the Report from the Joint Committee on the Human Tissue and Embryos (Draft) Bill Cm 7209. ( London: Department of Health, 2007).
31. Department of Health, Liberating the NHS: Report of the Arm's-length Bodies Review ( London: Department of Health, 2010).  
32. Department of Health and Social Security, Report of the Committee of Inquiry into Human Fertilisation and Embryology (The Warnock Report), Cm. 9314. ( London: HMSO, 1984).
33. Donor Conception Support Group of Australia Inc., Let the Offspring Speak: Discussions on Donor Conception ( Georges Hall: New South Wales, Donor Conception Support Group of Australia Inc., 1997).
34. Freeman T. , Jadva V. , Kramer W. , et al, "‘Gamete donation: Parents’ experiences of searching for their child’s donor siblings and donor’", Human Reproduction Vol 24( 2009) 505516.
35. Frith L. , Blyth E. , Farrand A. , "‘UK gamete donors’ reflections on the removal of anonymity: Implications for recruitment’", Human Reproduction Vol 22( 2007) 16751680. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dem061
36. Golombok S. , Cook R. , Bish A. , et al, "‘Families created by the new reproductive technologies: Quality of parenting and social and emotional development of the children’", Child Development Vol 66( 1995) 285298. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1131578
37. Golombok S. , Brewaeys A. , Cook R. , et al, "‘The European study of assisted conception families: Family functioning and child development’", Human Reproduction Vol 11( 1996) 23242331. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a019098
38. Golombok S. , Brewaeys A. , Giavazzi M.T. , et al, "‘The European study of assisted reproduction families: The transition to adolescence’", Human Reproduction Vol 17( 2002a) 830840. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/17.3.830
39. Golombok S. , MacCallum F. , Goodman E. , et al, "‘Families with children conceived by donor insemination: A follow up at age twelve’", Child Development Vol 73( 2002) 952968. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00449
40. Golombok S. , Murray C. , Jadva V. , et al, "‘Non-genetic and non-gestational parenthood: Consequences for parent–child relationships and the psychological well-being of mothers, fathers and children at age 3’", Human Reproduction Vol 21( 2006) 19181924. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/del039
41. Gottlieb C. , Lalos O. , Lindblad F. , "‘Disclosure of donor insemination to the child: The impact of Swedish legislation on couples’ attitudes’", Human Reproduction Vol 15( 2000) 20522056. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/15.9.2052
42. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, Annual Report ( London: Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, 1992).
43. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, Code of Practice ( 5th edn). ( London: Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, 2001).
44. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, Disclosure of Information Relating to Gamete Donation CH(04)07. 28 October. ( London: Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, 2004).
45. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, Tomorrow's Children: Report of the Policy Review of Welfare of the Child Assessments in Licensed Assisted Conception Treatment ( London: Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, 2005a).  
46. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, New Guidance on Welfare of the Child Assessments ( London: Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, 2005b).  
47. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, Code of Practice ( 7th edn). ( London: Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, 2007).
48. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, Opening the Register Policy – A Principled ApproachTRIM reference: 2008/07083. (London: Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, 2008a)
49. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, Code of Practice ( 8th edn). ( London: Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, 2008b).  
50. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, Disclosure of Donor Codes CH(09)02 19 March. ( London: Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, 2009a).  
51. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, HFEA Decision Regarding the Disclosure of Donor Codes 20 March. ( London: Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, 2009b). 
52. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, Disclosure of Donor Codes to Gamete and Embryo Recipients: Evaluation and Review of HFEA Policy ( London: Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, 2009c).
53. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, Donation Review – Update and Early Options [HFEA (07/07/10) 561] 7 July. ( London: Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, 2010a).  
54. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, Disclosure of Donor Codes CH (10)06. 30 July. ( London: Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, 2010b).  
55. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, F-2010-00184 - Legal Advice on Disclosure of Donor Codes 23 August. ( London: Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, 2010c). 
56. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (Disclosure of Donor Information) Regulations 2004. Statutory Instrument 2004 No. 1511
57. Hunter M. , Salter-Ling N. , Glover L. , "‘Donor insemination: Telling children about their origins’", Child Psychology and Psychiatry Review Vol 5( 2000) 157163.
58. Jadva V. , Murray C. , Lycett E. , et al, "‘Surrogacy: The experiences of surrogate mothers’", Human Reproduction Vol 18( 2003) 21962204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deg397
59. Jones C. , Why Donor Insemination Requires Developments in Family Law: The Need for New Definitions of Parenthood ( New York: Edwin Mellen Press, 2007).
60. Kirkman M. , "‘Parents’ contributions to the narrative identity of offspring of donor-assisted conception’", Social Science and Medicine Vol 57( 2003) 22292242. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0277-9536(03)00099-6
61. Lalos A. , Gottlieb C. , Lalos O. , "‘Legislated right for donor-insemination children to know their genetic origin: A study of parental thinking’", Human Reproduction Vol 22( 2007) 17591768. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dem063
62. Leeb-Lundberg S. , Kjellberg S. , Sydsjö G. , "‘Helping parents to tell their children about the use of donor insemination (di) and determining their opinions about open-identity sperm donors’", Acta Obstetrica et Gynecologica Scandinavia Vol 85( 2006) 7881. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00016340500334851
63. Lorbach C. , Experiences of Donor Conception: Parents, Offspring and Donors through the Years ( London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers, 2003).
64. Lycett E. , Daniels K. , Curson R. , et al, "‘Offspring created as a result of donor insemination: A study of family relationships, child adjustment, and disclosure’", Fertility and Sterility Vol 82( 2004) 172179. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2003.11.039
65. Lycett E. , Daniels K. , Curson R. , et al, "‘School-aged children of donor insemination: A study of parents’ disclosure patterns’", Human Reproduction Vol 20( 2005) 810819. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deh703
66. MacCallum F. , Lycett E. , Murray C. , et al, "‘Surrogacy: The experience of commissioning couples’", Human Reproduction Vol 18( 2003) 13341342. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deg253
67. 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 Vol 8( 1996) 243251.
68. McWhinnie A. , Families Following Assisted Conception: What Do We Tell Our Child? ( Dundee: Dundee University Department of Social Work, 1996).
69. Milsom I. , Bergman P. , "‘A study of parental attitudes after donor insemination’", Acta Obstetrica et Gynecologica Scandinavia Vol 61( 1982) 125128.
70. Montuschi O. , Merricks W. , "‘Why children need to know’". Presentation at PROGRESS/ESHRE Conference on Gamete Privacy: Should Egg and Sperm Donors Be Anonymous?( London, 4 December 2000).
71. Murray C. , Golombok S. , "‘To tell or not to tell: The decision-making process of egg donation’", Human Fertility Vol 6( 2003) 8995. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1464770312331369123
72. Nachtigall R.D. , Tschann J.M. , Quiroga S.S. , et al, "‘Stigma disclosure, family functioning among parents of children conceived through donor insemination’", Fertility and Sterility Vol 68( 1997) 8389. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(97)81480-X
73. Nachtigall R.D. , Becker G. , Szkupinski Quigora S. , et al, "‘The disclosure decision: Concerns and issues of parents of children conceived through donor insemination’", American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology Vol 178( 1998) 11651170. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9378(98)70318-7
74. Novaes S. ,, "‘The medical management of donor insemination’". In Donor Insemination: International Social Science Perspectives . eds. Daniels K.R. , Haimes E. ( Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998).
75. The Parental Orders (Human Fertilisation and Embryology) (Scotland) Regulations 1994. Statutory Instrument 1994 No. 2804 (S.141)
76. The Parental Orders (Human Fertilisation and Embryology) Regulations 1994 Statutory Instrument 1994 No. 2767
77. Rose and Another versus Secretary of State for Health and Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority(2002) EWHC 1593, [2003] 2 FLR 962.
78. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Donor Insemination ( London: Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, 1987).
79. Rumball A. , Adair V. , "‘Telling the story: Parents’ scripts for donor offspring’", Human Reproduction Vol 14( 1999) 13921399. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/14.5.1392
80. Scheib J.E. , Riordan M. , Rubin S. , "‘Choosing identity-release sperm donors: The parents’ perspective 13 to 18 years later’", Human Reproduction Vol 18( 2003) 11151127. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deg227
81. Scheib J.E. , Riordan M. , Rubin S. , "‘Adolescents with open-identity sperm donors: Reports from 12–17 year olds’", Human Reproduction Vol 20( 2004) 239252. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deh581
82. Science and Technology Committee, Human Reproductive Technologies and the Law. Fifth Report of Session 2004–05 . Vol Vol I. ( London: House of Commons, 2005).  
83. Snowden R. , Mitchell G.D. , Snowden E.M. , Artificial Reproduction: A Social Investigation ( London: George Allen and Unwin, 1983).
84. Söderström-Anttila V. , Sälevaara M. , Suikkari A.M. , "‘Increasing openness in oocyte donation families regarding disclosure over 15 years’", Human Reproduction ( 2010) Advance Access 2 August doi:10.1093/humrep/deq194
85. United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, Consideration of Reports Submitted by States Parties Under Article 44 of the Convention: Concluding Observations: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland CRC/C/15/Add.188. 9 October. ( Geneva: United Nations, 2002).
86. van Berkel D. , van der Veen L. , Kimmel I. , et al, "‘Differences in the attitudes of couples whose children were conceived through artificial insemination by donor in 1980 and in 1996’", Fertility and Sterility Vol 71( 1999) 226231. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(98)00448-8
87. van den Akker O.B.A. , "‘A survey of the functions and responsibilities of organisations dealing with surrogate motherhood’", Human Fertility Vol 1( 1998) 1013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1464727982000198031
88. Wincott E. , Crawshaw M. , "‘From a social issue to policy: Social work’s advocacy for the rights of donor conceived people to genetic origins information in the United Kingdom’", Social Work in Health Care Vol 43( 2/3) ( 2006) 5372.
http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/157181812x608291
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/157181812x608291
2012-01-01
2016-12-07

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
     
    The International Journal of Children's Rights — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation