American Journal of Bioethics 13 (5):W6 - W8 (2013)
Authors |
|
Abstract |
Over the years a number of countries have abolished anonymous gamete donation and shifted toward open-identity policies. Donor-conceived children are said to have a fundamental “right to know” the identity of their donor. In this article, we trace the arguments that underlie this claim and question its implications. We argue that, given the status attributed to the right to know one's gamete donor, it would be discriminatory not to extend this right to naturally conceived children with misattributed paternity. One way to facilitate this would be through routine paternity testing at birth. While this proposal is likely to raise concerns about the conflicting interests and rights of other people involved, we show that similar concerns apply to the context of open-identity gamete donation. Unless one can identify a rational basis for treating the two groups differently, one's stance toward both cases should be the same.
|
Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
ISBN(s) | |
DOI | 10.1080/15265161.2013.781365 |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
Conceived and Deceived: The Medical Interests of Donor‐Conceived Individuals.Vardit Ravitsky - 2012 - Hastings Center Report 42 (1):17-22.
Thinking Ethically About Genetic Inheritance: Liberal Rights, Communitarianism and the Right to Privacy for Parents of Donor Insemination Children.J. Burr & P. Reynolds - 2008 - Journal of Medical Ethics 34 (4):281-284.
Beneath the Rhetoric: The Role of Rights in the Practice of Non-Anonymous Gamete Donation.Lucy Frith - 2001 - Bioethics 15 (5-6):473-484.
Pharmaceutical Companies: The Perfect Scapegoat for Everything.Pepe Lee Chang - 2013 - American Journal of Bioethics 13 (5):30-32.
View all 17 references / Add more references
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Genetic Enhancement Revisited: Response to Open Peer Commentaries.Ruiping Fan - 2010 - American Journal of Bioethics 10 (4):6-8.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Do Researchers Have an Obligation to Actively Look for Genetic Incidental Findings?”.Catherine Gliwa & Benjamin E. Berkman - 2013 - American Journal of Bioethics 13 (5):W10 - W11.
An Unbiased Response to the Open Peer Commentaries on “Does Consent Bias Research?”.Mark A. Rothstein & Abigail B. Shoben - 2013 - American Journal of Bioethics 13 (4):W1 - W4.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Disclosing Individual Genetic Results to Research Participants”: Defining Clinical Utility And Revisiting the Role of Relationships.Vardit Ravitsky & Benjamin S. Wilfond - 2006 - American Journal of Bioethics 6 (6):W10-W12.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “An Open Letter to Institutional Review Boards Considering Northfield Laboratories' PolyHeme® Trial ”: The Emergency Exception and Unproven/Unsatisfactory Treatment.Ken Kipnis, Nancy M. P. King & Robert M. Nelson - 2006 - American Journal of Bioethics 6 (3):W49-W50.
Why Disclosure of Genetic Ancestry in Misattributed Paternity Cases Should Be Treated Differently From Disclosure in Adoption and Gamete Donation.Reuven Brandt - 2013 - American Journal of Bioethics 13 (5):58-60.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Donation After Circulatory Death: Burying the Dead Donor Rule”.David Rodríguez-Arias, Maxwell J. Smith & Neil M. Lazar - 2011 - American Journal of Bioethics 11 (8):W4-W6.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “The Coming Era of Nanomedicine”.Fritz Allhoff - 2009 - American Journal of Bioethics 9 (10):1-2.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “A Broader View of Justice”.Nancy S. Jecker - 2008 - American Journal of Bioethics 8 (10):1-2.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “A Decisional Analysis of Consent”.Jonathan Baron - 2006 - American Journal of Bioethics 6 (3):W51-W53.
Responses to Open Peer Commentaries on “The Subjective Brain, Identity, and Neuroethics”.Grant R. Gillett - 2009 - American Journal of Bioethics 9 (9):1-4.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Why Treat the Wounded?”.Michael L. Gross - 2008 - American Journal of Bioethics 8 (2):W1 – W3.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Must Research Participants Understand Randomization?”.David Wendler - 2009 - American Journal of Bioethics 9 (2):W1 – W2.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2013-10-26
Total views
12 ( #812,474 of 2,518,149 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #408,577 of 2,518,149 )
2013-10-26
Total views
12 ( #812,474 of 2,518,149 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #408,577 of 2,518,149 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads