Search

Parents of children conceived by gamete (sperm or egg) donation often find it challenging to share donor conception stories with their children. This study reports findings of a qualitative study of families with children conceived by donor insemination in New Zealand, a country where the policy and practice of sharing information in donor insemination is advanced. Almost all parents had told, or planned to tell, their children about their origins, but some parents faced considerable dilemmas around disclosure. Parents need to be given support and guidance as they inform their children about their donor family history.

To purchase or authenticate to the full-text of this article, please visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9566.2007.01010.x Byline: Victoria M. Grace (1), Ken R. Daniels (2) Keywords: donor insemination; procreation; reproduction; genetic inheritance; information-sharing; family connectedness Abstract: Abstract Informing offspring of the nature of their conception when conceived via donated gametes such as donor sperm, is increasingly considered by professionals and policy makers to be desirable for many reasons. The aim of this research is to explore and understand processes within families that either facilitate or hinder the telling of children about their conception. This exploration includes analysing the complexity of sociocultural processes surrounding parents' attempts to make sense of, and construct meanings of 'family'. We analyse the stories of a group of New Zealand parents, representing 41 families, who have formed their families with the assistance of donor insemination. The analysis takes its point of departure from current sociological and anthropological debates in the field of kinship, or family studies. We argue that parents generate a parallel construct whereby genetic inheritance is seen to be simultaneously irrelevant (to the constitution of the family), and yet at the same time relevant (in highly bounded domains, for example related to medically specified conditions). We analyse the ambiguities of interpreting this construct as one reflecting a separation of procreation from the process of reproduction, and reflect on the implications for information-sharing. Author Affiliation: (1)Sociology and Anthropology, University of Canterbury, New Zealand (2)Social Work and Human Services, University of Canterbury, New Zealand Article note: Address for correspondence: Victoria M. Grace, School of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch, New Zealand e-mail: victoria.grace@canterbury.ac.nz

This article considers two key policy documents concerning donor-assisted conception in the UK, The British Fertility Society's Recommendations for Good Practice on the Screening of Egg and Embryo Donors and the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority's Guidance for Egg Sharing Arrangements. It discusses both the process and the evidence used in formulating those sections of the documents which relate to donor anonymity. The paper concludes that psycho-social policy developments in assisted conception, such as those relating to donor anonymity, should be subjected to comparable levels of rigour and scrutiny to those that are applied in the formulation of medical and scientific policies. Keywords: Human fertilisation and embryology authority; British fertility society; Donor anonymity; Egg sharing; UK

Public policy issues regarding assisted human reproduction (AHR) are examined, focusing on how the interests of AHR professionals, state officials and parents of AHR offspring define the policy debate. Topics include a framework for defining the best interests of AHR offspring, and considerations concerning when a private wish becomes a public policy matter.

The authors report on a comparative questionnaire study of semen donors at two London clinics offering donor insemination (DI). Results presented here include donors' attitudes towards the storage of identifying information on the UK Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority's central register, the importance of anonymity when donating, feelings about being traced by DI offspring, and views on the release of identifying donor information to mature offspring. Donors from the two clinics were found to differ on some, although not all, of the above points; in particular, donors from one clinic offered more support for the eventual release of identifying information to DI offspring. The discussion brings in the results of other studies and highlights the complexity of the anonymity question. The authors conclude that some donors may be willing to move towards greater openness of information under controlled conditions using the existing central register and a 'veto' system. Key words - donor insemination, semen donors, anonymity, tracing

The authors examine the implications for individuals and society of how semen is provided for use in donor insemination treatment. In particular, they focus on whether 'donors' make a gift of their semen or are paid. The role of health professionals in shaping the nature and meaning of semen provision is also explored. The currently predominant practice of buying semen is compared with other reproductive and biomedical exchanges: oocyte and embryo donation, surrogacy, and blood, organ and fetal tissue donation. The authors suggest that the commercialisation of semen determines and reflects the type of men frequently recruited to provide semen. This in turn influences the meaning that donors themselves, recipients, offspring, health professionals and society at large attribute to the provision of semen. Key words - donor insemination, gifts, semen donors, policy

The issue of openness and secrecy in the use of donor gametes is the subject of considerable disagreement and debate, not only for social scientists and health professionals, but also for the recipients of donor gametes. This paper has its origins in a study of 58 couples who had a child/children as a result of donor insemination (DI) at the Dunedin Infertility Clinic. Respondents completed questionnaires and took part in an interview during which they were asked whether they intended to tell their offspring about their DI conception. The nature of agreement/disagreement between partners on this issue, the dynamics operating between couples that may affect decision-making, and the views of couples in a time-frame perspective are the focus of this paper. Transcripts from some of the interviews are presented to illustrate the points made and commentary and discussion is provided.

This paper addresses one of the most important problems in the area of assisted reproduction, namely the selection policies used by the providers of the services. Some of the difficulties involved in formulating policies in this area are outlined. The paper concludes that public involvement in decision making in this area is vital, and that to facilitate this the issues must be opened up to public scrutiny and debate. Such a debate would be a significant first step towards the implementation of policies which reflect the opinion of the entire community rather than just the professionals who provide the service, or sectional groups who manage to influence the professionals.

Infertility counselling should also consider psychosocial issues, aswell as the exisiting focus on psychological and emotional issues. Responding to the couple's emotional requirements are paramount; along with awareness of the people associated to the couple; the importance of self-help and support groups, and a team and multi-role approach on counselling; identification of the type of counselling required; and consideration of ethical issues and social policy.