Sperm donor anonymity and compensation: an experiment with American sperm donors

被引:28
|
作者
Cohen, Glenn [1 ]
Coan, Travis [2 ]
Ottey, Michelle [3 ]
Boyd, Christina [4 ]
机构
[1] Harvard Law Sch, Cambridge, MA 02138 USA
[2] Univ Exeter, Dept Polit, Exeter EX4 4RJ, Devon, England
[3] Fairfax Cryobank Inc, Fairfax, VA 19104 USA
[4] Fertil Ctr San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78229 USA
来源
JOURNAL OF LAW AND THE BIOSCIENCES | 2016年 / 3卷 / 03期
基金
英国经济与社会研究理事会;
关键词
Reproductive technologies; sperm donation; anonymity; donor-conceived; sperm banking; egg banking; RIGHT-TO-KNOW; GAMETE DONATION; INSEMINATION;
D O I
10.1093/jlb/lsw052
中图分类号
B82 [伦理学(道德学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Most sperm donation that occurs in the USA proceeds through anonymous donation. While some clinics make the identity of the sperm donor available to a donor-conceived child at age 18 as part of 'open identification' or 'identity release programs,' no US law requires clinics to do so, and the majority of individuals do not use these programs. By contrast, in many parts of the world, there have been significant legislative initiatives requiring that sperm donor identities be made available to children after a certain age (typically when the child turns 18). One major concern with prohibiting anonymous sperm donation has been that the number of willing sperm donors will decrease leading to shortages, as have been experienced in some of the countries that have prohibited sperm donor anonymity. One possible solution, suggested by prior work, would be to pay current anonymous sperm donors more per donation to continue to donate when their anonymity is removed. Using a unique sample of current anonymous and open identity sperm donors from a large sperm bank in the USA, we test that approach. As far as we know, this is the first attempt to examine what would happen if the USA adopted a prohibition on anonymous sperm donation that used the most ecologically valid population, current sperm donors. We find that 29% of current anonymous sperm donors in the sample would refuse to donate if the law changed such that they were required to put their names in a registry available to donor-conceived children at age 18. When we look at the remaining sperm donors who would be willing to participate, we find that they would demand an additional $60 per donation (using our preferred specification). We also discuss the ramifications for the industry.
引用
收藏
页码:468 / 488
页数:21
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Can You Buy Sperm Donor Identification? An Experiment
    Cohen, I. Glenn
    Coan, Travis G.
    JOURNAL OF EMPIRICAL LEGAL STUDIES, 2013, 10 (04) : 715 - 740
  • [22] Anonymous or known donors? A brief discussion of the psychosocial issues raised by removing anonymity from sperm donors
    Burr, Jennifer A.
    HUMAN FERTILITY, 2013, 16 (01) : 44 - 47
  • [23] Fecundability trends among sperm donors as a measure of donor performance
    Thyer, AC
    Patton, PE
    Burry, KA
    Mixon, BA
    Wolf, DP
    FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 1999, 71 (05) : 891 - 895
  • [24] Donor sperm for intracytoplasmic sperm injection
    Tews, G
    Yaman, C
    Ebner, T
    Moser, M
    LANCET, 2001, 358 (9290): : 1373 - 1373
  • [25] The reduction of sperm donor candidates due to the abolition of the anonymity rule: Analysis of an argument
    Guido, P
    JOURNAL OF ASSISTED REPRODUCTION AND GENETICS, 2001, 18 (11) : 617 - 622
  • [26] Sperm donor recruitment within an NHS fertility service since the removal of anonymity
    Tomlinson, Mathew J.
    Pooley, Karen
    Pierce, Angela
    Hopkisson, James F.
    HUMAN FERTILITY, 2010, 13 (03) : 159 - 167
  • [27] Why do egg donors receive less financial compensation than sperm donors?
    Fystro, Joar Rokke
    TIDSSKRIFT FOR DEN NORSKE LAEGEFORENING, 2024, 144 (05)
  • [28] Sperm donation in Israel: secrecy and anonymity
    Soffer, Y.
    Birenbaum-Carmeli, D.
    BASIC AND CLINICAL ANDROLOGY, 2010, 20 : 11 - 19
  • [29] SECRECY OF SPERM DONORS
    不详
    SOUTH AFRICAN MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1981, 59 (14): : 474 - 474
  • [30] Sperm donor recruitment, attitudes and provider practices-5 years after the removal of donor anonymity
    Shukla, U.
    Deval, B.
    Perez, M. Jansa
    Hamoda, H.
    Savvas, M.
    Narvekar, N.
    HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2013, 28 (03) : 676 - 682