Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (55.9 KB).
REFERENCES
- 1.Cook R, Golombok S. A survey of semen donation: Phase II-The view of the donors. Hum Reprod. 1995;10:951–959. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a136069. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Rowland R. Attitudes and opinions of donors on an artificial insemination by donor (AID) programme. Clin Reprod Fertil. 1985;2:249–259. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Purdie A, Peek JC, Adair V, Graham F, Fisher R. Attitudes of parents of young children to sperm donation-Implications for donor recruitment. Hum Reprod. 1994;9:1355–1358. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a138709. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Daniels KR. Semen donors: Their motivations and attitudes to their offspring. J Reprod Infant Psychol. 1989;7:121–127. [Google Scholar]
- 5.Pedersen B, Nielsen AF, Lauritsen JG. Psychosocial aspects of donor insemination. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1994;73:701–705. doi: 10.3109/00016349409029407. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Sauer MV, Gorrill MJ, Zeffer KB, Bustillo M. Attitudinal survey of sperm donors to an artificial insemination clinic. J Reprod Med. 1989;34:362–364. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Schover LR, Rothmann SA, Collins RL. The personality and motivation of semen donors: A comparison with oocyte donors. Hum Reprod. 1992;7:575–579. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a137694. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Soderström-Anttila V. Follow-up study of Finnish volunteer oocyte donors concerning their attitudes to oocyte donation. Hum Reprod. 1995;10:3073–2076. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a135852. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Baetens P, Pennings G, Kristoffersen I, Pletincx I, Devroey P. Provision of donor information to the offspring: The opinion of candidate semen donors, students, and fathers. Hum Reprod. 1999;14:251. [Google Scholar]
- 10.Cook R, Golombok S. A survey of semen donation: Phase II-the view of the donors. Hum Reprod. 1995;10:951–959. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a136069. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.British Andrology Society: Implementation of theWithdrawal of Payments To Semen Donors, 1998 [on-line]. Available: http://www.repromed.org.uk/bas/Bas2000/HFEA/bas18.html
- 12.De Bruyn JK, De Graaff IA, Brewaeys A, Helmerhorst FM.Knowing the unknown: Donor insemination couple's choices for an anonymous/identifiable donor Hum Reprod 19961153–54.9147102 [Google Scholar]
- 13.Back KW, Snowden R. The anonymity of the gamete donor. J Psychosom Obstet Gynecol. 1988;9:191–1982. doi: 10.3109/01674828809016801. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Daniels K, Lalos O. The Swedish insemination act and the availability of donors. Hum Reprod. 1995;10:1871–1874. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a136196. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Trommelen M, den Otter M, van der Veen G. Bereidheid tot Donatie van Sperma bij Opheffing van de Anonimiteitswaarborg van de Donor. Den Haag: SWOKA; 1999. [Google Scholar]
- 16.Heurckmans N, Pennings G, Sabbe K, Baetens P, Rigo A, Pletincs I, Devroey P, Ponjaert-Kristoffersen I: The attitude toward offspring by donor candidates and non-donors: The in-fluence of payment, age and fatherhood. Hum Reprod in press. Abstr. Book 1.
- 17.Pennings G. The internal coherence of donor insemination practice: Attracting the right type of donor without paying. Hum Reprod. 1997;12:1842–1844. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a019604. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Baran A, Pannor R. Lethal Secrets: The Psychology of Donor Insemination. New York: Amistad Press; 1993. [Google Scholar]
- 19.Glover J. Fertility and the Family. London: Fourth Estate; 1989. [Google Scholar]
- 20.Pennings G. Measuring the welfare of the child: In search of the appropriate evaluation principle. Hum Reprod. 1999;14:1146–1150. doi: 10.1093/humrep/14.5.1146. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Bogdan M. Artificial insemination in Swedish law. Comparative Law Yearbook. 1988;10:91–106. [Google Scholar]
- 22.Pennings G. Should donors have the right to decide who receives their gametes? Hum Reprod. 1995;10:2736–2740. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a135777. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Baran A, Pannor R. Lethal Secrets: The Psychology of Donor Insemination. New York: Amistad Press; 1993. [Google Scholar]
- 24.Novaes SB. The medical management of donor insemination. In: Daniels KR, Haimes E, editors. Donor Insemination. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1998. pp. 105–130. [Google Scholar]
- 25.Schiff AR. Frustrated intentions and binding biology: Seeking AID in the law. Duke Law J. 1994;44:524–570. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Swanson HSW. Donor anonymity in artificial insemination: Is it still necessary? Columbia J Law Soc Probl. 1993;27:151–190. [Google Scholar]
- 27.Novaes SB. The medical management of donor insemination. In: Daniels KR, Haimes E, editors. Donor Insemination. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1998. pp. 105–130. [Google Scholar]
- 28.Schenker JG. Sperm, oocyte, and pre-embryo donation. J Ass Reprod Genet. 1995;12:499–508. doi: 10.1007/BF02212912. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Pennings G. The 'double track' policy for donor anonymity. Hum Reprod. 1997;12:2839–2844. doi: 10.1093/humrep/12.12.2839. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Shenfield F. Privacy versus disclosure in gamete donation: A clash of interest, of duties, or an exercise in responsibility? J Ass Reprod Genet. 1997;14:371–373. doi: 10.1007/BF02766140. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]