The Donor‐conceived Child's ‘Right to Personal Identity’: The Public Debate on Donor Anonymity in the United Kingdom
| Published date | 01 March 2012 |
| Author | Ilke Turkmendag |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6478.2012.00570.x |
| Date | 01 March 2012 |
JOURNAL OF LAW AND SOCIETY
VOLUME 39, NUMBER 1, MARCH 2012
ISSN: 0263-323X, pp. 58±75
The Donor-conceived Child's `Right to Personal Identity':
The Public Debate on Donor Anonymity in the United
Kingdom
Ilke Turkmendag*
On 1 April 2005, with the implementation of the Human Fertilisation
and Embryology Authority (Disclosure of Donor Information) Regula-
tions 2004, United Kingdom law was changed to allow children born
through gamete donation to access details identifying the donor.
Drawing on trends in adoption law, the decision to abolish donor
anonymity was strong ly influenced by a disc ourse that asserted th e
`child's right to personal identity'. Through examination of the donor
anonymity debate in the public realm, while adopting a social con-
structionist approach, this article discusses how donor anonymity has
been defined as a social problem that requires a regulative response. It
focuses on the child's `right to personal identity' claims, and discusses
the genetic essentialism behind these claims. By basing its assumptions
on an adoption analogy, United Kingdom law ascribes a social
meaning to the genetic relatedness between gamete donors and the
offspring.
INTRODUCTION
In the United Kingdom, a large number of infertile couples seek in vitro
fertilization using donor gametes.
1
According to the Human Fertilisation and
Embryology Authority (HFEA) Register in 2006, 1124 children were born
58
ß2012 The Author. Journal of Law and Society ß2012 Cardiff University Law School. Published by Blackwell Publishing
Ltd, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA
*Policy Ethics and Life Sciences Research Centre (PEALS), University of
Newcastle, Claremont Bridge, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU, England
ilke.turkmendag@ncl.ac.uk
1 The most common assisted reproduction method. It involves removal of sperm and
eggs (gametes) from the couple to produce embryos in the laboratory. If the patient
cannot conceive their own gametes, donated gametes or embryos can be used. `Donor
conception' refers to the use of gametes or embryos that have been donated by a third
person to enable intended recipients to become parents.
using donated eggs and sperm.
2
Using donor gametes to conceive may be as
close an approximation to genetic parenthood as possible; one might be able
to give birth to `a baby', and that baby may even be genetically connected to
oneself or one's partner.
3
Nevertheless it does not constitute an equivalent
alternative for those for whom genetic relatedness to their children is of great
importance.
4
In societies where genetic relatedness is perceived to be both a
natural desire and the social norm, donor conception might invoke abnor-
mality, and having a donor-conceived child may constitute a permanent
charge of deviance against the family. Hence, most donor-conceived families
have an information control strategy that will give the resultant child and
parents the greatest comfort and ease so as to make the experience as
`natural' as possible. A common strategy is keeping donor conception a
secret, so that the family and the child pass as `normal'.
5
However, since the
1980s, this parenting strategy has been challenged by the disclosure
regulations. Sweden was the first country to remove anonymity from gamete
donors, in 1985. Since then, similar laws were introduced in a number of
European countries. The United Kingdom joined this group in 2004.
Towards the end of the 1990s, there was an alarming decrease in the
numbers of people coming forward as sperm donors in the United Kingdom.
For example, 437 sperm donors were recruited in 1994±1995, but only 271
in 1998±1999.
6
Because of the shortage, it was claimed that some would-be
parents became so desperate that they placed advertisements in newspapers.
The problem was perceived to be so severe that there were efforts to
establish a new independent organization to promote egg and sperm donation
to infertile couples.
7
Interestingly, while donor shortage was becoming a
growing concern, in 2001, the government launched a consultation to review
the legislation governing access to information for those conceived through
gamete donation. Given that lifting anonymity has generally had a negative
impact on both the demand for, and the recruitment of, gamete donors,
8
it is
59
2 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA), `For parents of donor-
conceived children' (2008), at .
3 M. Strathern, After Nature: English Kinship in the Late Twentieth Century (1992).
4 D. Elsner, `Ju st Another Rep roductive Te chnology? Th e Ethics of Huma n
Reproductive Cloning as an Experimental Medical Procedure' (2006) 32 J. of
Medical Ethics 596±600.
5 I. Turkmendag, `The Removal of Donor Anonymity in the UK: The Silencing of
Claims by Would-be Parents' (2009) PhD thesis, University of Nottingham.
6 HFEA Re gis ter (20 08); ` Numb er of sp erm an d egg do nors ' at p://
www.hfea.gov.uk/en/1462.html>.
7 `Push for sperm and egg donors' BBC News, 15 June 1998, at
1/low/health/113119.stm>.
8
J.N. Robinson, et al., `Attitudes of donors and recipients to gamete donation' (1991) 6
Human Reproduction 307±9; L.R. Schover et al., `The personality and motivation of
semen donors: a comparison with oocyte donors' (1992) 7 Human Reproduction 575±9;
R. Cook and S. Golombok, `Ethics and society: A survey of semen donation: phase II ±
the view of the donors' (1995) 10 Human Reproduction 951±9; S. Paul et al.,
ß2012 The Author. Journal of Law and Society ß2012 Cardiff University Law School
To continue reading
Request your trial