2. British Infertility Counselling Association, Papers given at Northern Study Day on 29th October 1990 at York District Hospital. Presented at the British Infertility Counselling Association, Northern Study Day; York District Hospital, York, UK; 1990.
incomplete: incomplete.
This collection of addresses contains: a brief recent history of infertility treatments in England and Wales, feminist thoughts on infertilty, consumer viewpoints on infertility, reports on counselling in IVF and DI settings, and on the experiences of a support group in a district hospital.
3. American FSEC. Ethical Considerations of the New Reproductive Technologies. Fertility & Sterility. 1986;46(3(Supplement 1)):36S-38S.
AFS, America, guidelines, ethics, practice: AFS, America, guidelines, ethics, practice.
not provided - several chapters to the report.
4. American Fertility Society. New guidelines for the use of semen donor insemination. Fertility and Sterility. 1990;53(3 Suppl 1):1S-13S.
America, screening, selection, guidelines, donors, payment, consent, records: America, screening, selection, guidelines, donors, payment, consent, records.
5. Annas GJ. Artificial insemination: beyond the best interests of the donor. Hastings Centre Report. 1979;9(4):14-5, 43.
sperm donors, selection, policy, secrecy, records, standards, medical aspects, doctors' attitudes: sperm donors, selection, policy, secrecy, records, standards, medical aspects, doctors' attitudes.
see keywords.
6. Annas G. Fathers anonymous: beyond the best interests of the sperm donor. Family Law Quarterly. 1980;14:1-13.
anonymity, legal, psychsocial, vendor, donor, eugenics, health professionals, screening, recipients, policy, records, interests of child, medical, attitudes: anonymity, legal, psychsocial, vendor, donor, eugenics, health professionals, screening, recipients, policy, records, interests of child, medical, attitudes.
Argues that present informal policies concerning AID are the result of legal pitfalls and failure to pay sufficient attention to best interests of children. Refers to Curie-Cohen's research. Notes that AID is used for eugenic purposes thus it is generally the best interest of the couple or parent that is the main concern. He claims that doctors are not competent to screen recipients. On donor selction, he argues for use of term sperm vendor. Critical of doctor's eugenic choice of students as donors and mentions doctors' lack of specific training in even simple genetics. Discusses the irrelevance of wife of sperm donor signing consent form and how it is important to keep records.
Makes six recommendations for organizing practice of AID and appeals for an end to legal concerns about uniform legislation and a beginning to development of professional standards, where self-protection gives way to concern for the child.
7. Archbishop of Canterbury CAbHGt. Artificial Human Insemination: London: Society for the Propogation of Christian Knowledge; 1948.
8. Asche A. Creating Children: Report of the Family Law Council of Australia: Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.; 1985.
9. Back KW, Snowden R. The anonymity of the gamete donor. Journal of Psychosomatice Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 1988;9:191-198.
donor insemination, anonymity, secrecy, donors, family, social attitudes, identity.: donor insemination, anonymity, secrecy, donors, family, social attitudes, identity.
This article addresses the arguments for and against donor anonymity by exmining issues of family, personal identity, and the views that people have of gamete donors. It draws on a study of 899 case records of DI couples, and interviews with a sub-sample of 57 couples to reach the conclusion that openess about DI has little negative affect can alleviate family problems that may arise. It argues that secrecy about DI may reinforce negative stereotypes about donors and about assisted reproduction, and that it violates social norms of interpersonal relations.
10. Baran A, Pannor R. Lethal Secrets. New York: Warner Books; 1989.
.11. Barratt CLR, Monteiro EF, Chauhan M, Cooke S. Screening donors for sexually transmitted disease in donor insemination clinics in the UK. A survey. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 1989;96:461-466.
donor insemination, clinics, practice etc: donor insemination, clinics, practice etc.
entry not complete.
12. Barratt CLR, Chauhan M, Cooke ID. Donor insemination - a look to the future. Fertility & Sterility. 1990;54(3):375-387.
donors, recipients, screening, selection, donor insemination, UK: donors, recipients, screening, selection, donor insemination, UK.
Reviews the selction and recruitment of semen donors at a clinic and the screening of female recipients for factors that influence the probability of conception.
13. Beck WW. Two hundred years of artificial insemination. Fertility and Sterility. 1984;41(2):193-5.
14. Bell C, Newby H. Husbands and wives: the dynamics of the deferential dialectic. In: Barker DL, Allen S, eds. Dependence and Exploitation in Work and Marriage. New York: Longman; 1976.
see other library: see other library.
15. Berger DM. Couples' reactions to male infertility and donor insemination. American Journal of Psychiatry. 1980;137:1047-49.
male infertility, couples, secrecy, psychosocial, donor insemination, sexuality: male infertility, couples, secrecy, psychosocial, donor insemination, sexuality.
This study of 16 couples in which the husband had been diagnosed as infertile investigates the reactions of both husbands and wives to the infertility. It notes the reactions of anger, impotence, guilt and the success of couples in adjusting to infertility. It notes that those couples who waited a period before pursuing DI had adjusted better to infertility than those who had not. The article also concludes that secrecy about DI hinders the working through of conflicts about infertility.
16. Blank RH. Regulating Reproduction. N.Y.: Columbia University Press; 1990.
regulation, policy, law, ethics, US, assisted reproduction: regulation, policy, law, ethics, US, assisted reproduction.
This book provides an overview of recent developments in reproductive technology. It looks at ethical, regulatory and policy issues particularly in a US context and argues for greater public debate and more comprehensive regulatory control of this area.
17. Blizzard J. Blizzard and the Holy Ghost. London: Peter Owen; 1977.
donor insemination, male infertility, family, parenthood: donor insemination, male infertility, family, parenthood.
This book is primarily a record of one mans reaction to his own infertility and his experiences with DI. It also surveys ethical, legal and religious aspects of the debate surrounding DI.
18. Brandon J, Warner J. AID and Adoption: Some Comparisons. British Journal of Social Work. 1977;7(3):335-41.
DI, adoption, religion, law, social workers, psychosocial, secrecy, UK: DI, adoption, religion, law, social workers, psychosocial, secrecy, UK.
This paper compares adoption and DI in Britain. It notes the contemporary illegality of registering DI children as natural children in Britain, and notes issues of secrecy. It notes the church's opposition to DI but presents an argument against this. It also argues for openness and the rights of the child and for greater awareness of the psychosocial issues among social workers and those in related professions.
19. Brandon J. Telling the AID child. Adoption and Fostering. 1979;95:13-14.
20. Braude P, Johnson MH, Aitken RJ. Human fertilisation and embryology bill goes to report stage. British Medical Journal. 1990;300:1410-12.
.21. British Medical Association. Report of Panel on Human Artificial Insemination. British Medical Journal. 1973;2(3 Supplement):3.
22. Callan V. Infertility: A Guide for Couples. Melbourne, Australia: Pitman; 1988.
parenthood, infertility, in vitro fertilisation, support groups, counselling, psychosocial, couples, doctors, law, medicical aspects: parenthood, infertility, in vitro fertilisation, support groups, counselling, psychosocial, couples, doctors, law, medicical aspects.
This Australian guidebook for the infertile looks at ways of defining, livingwith and coping with infertility. It describes IVF procedures and looks at ways in which pregnancies can go wrong. It also addresses legal issues in relation to parenthood, and discusses the reasons why people want children.
23. Cary WH. Results of artificial insemination with extra-marital specimen (semi-adoption). American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1948;56:727-32.
secrecy, DI practice, US: secrecy, DI practice, US.
entry not complete.
24. Chauhan M, Barratt CLR, Cooke S, Cooke ID. A protocol for recruitment and screening of semen donors for an artificial insemination by donor programme. Human Reproduction. 1988;3(7):873-876.
donors, sexually transmitted disease, screening, selection, donor insemination, recruitment, payment, UK: donors, sexually transmitted disease, screening, selection, donor insemination, recruitment, payment, UK.
This study outlines a structured protocol for the recruitment and screening of semen donors for a DI programme. 191 potential donors were assessed. A step-wise analysis of these men is presented, reasons for and rates of rejections at each stage are documented and explained. A simple, structured approach to the assessment of potential semen donors is proposed.
25. Christianson# C. Support Groupsfor Infertile Patients. Journal of Obstetric Gynecologic and Neo-natal Nursing. 1986;15(4):293-6.
26. Clayton CE, Kovacs GT. A.I.D. - A pretreatment social assessment. Australia and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 1980;20:208-210.
entry not complete: entry not complete.
27. Cohen S, Wills TA. Stress, social support and the buffering hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin. 1985;98(2):310-357.
28. Curie-Cohen M, Luttrell L, Shapiro S. Current practice of artificial insemination by donor in the United States. New England Journal of Medicine. 1979;300(11):585-590.
DI, practice, policy, donors, recipients, selection, medical, secrecy, records, motivations, anonymity, demographics: DI, practice, policy, donors, recipients, selection, medical, secrecy, records, motivations, anonymity, demographics.
Of 711 physicians likely to perform DI surveyed, 471 responded, of whom 379 reported that they performed DI. They accounted for 3576 birthsin 1977. Gives percentage who use DI to prevent genetic defect transmission and to help single women. Most donors university students and screening for genetic disease superficial. Matching carried out. Number of cycles, use of multiple donors for one recipient. Only 37% kept records on children, and 30 on donors. Identity of donors closely guarded to ensure privacy and avoid legal complications.
29. Curie-Cohen M. The frequency of consanguineous matings due to multiple use of donors in artificial insemination. American Journal of Human Genetics. 1980;32:589-600.
consanguineous, DI, donors, recipients,: consanguineous, DI, donors, recipients,.
Concludes that in some communities the use of DI would actually reduce inbreeding because of the extent to which members of the community are already engaged in mating with close relatives - the logic is that if someone marries a cousin who is not actually a full cousin because he/she is DI offspring, this reduces the consanguinity.
30. Czyba JC, Chevret M. Psychological reactions of couples to artificial insemination with donor sperm. International Journal of Fertility. 1979;24(4):240-245.
donor insemination, couples, counselling, process, secrecy, sex roles, stress, psychosocial: donor insemination, couples, counselling, process, secrecy, sex roles, stress, psychosocial.
This article based on case histories of 62 couples describes the feelings that both males and females have as they go through the stages of becoming aware of male infertility, acceptance of DI as an option, pregnancy, childrearing and the desire for more children by this method. It favours secrecy about the donor and the DI conception.31. Daniels KR, Gunby J, Legge M, Williams TH, Wynn-Williams DB. Issues and problems for the infertile couple. New Zealand Medical Journal. 1984;97:185-7.
infertility: infertility.
32. Daniels KR. Psychosocial issues associated with being a semen donor. Clinical Reproduction and Fertility. 1986;4(5):341-51.
donors, psychosocial, informed consent, relationship model, network, Committees: donors, psychosocial, informed consent, relationship model, network, Committees.
An extensive range of psychosocial issues is discussed. These are presented via a 'relationship model' which has been developed to illustrate how the donor, through his act of donating, is involved in a series of relationships. Some of these are interactive, in that they are two way relationships, while others are non-reactive, being a one-way relationship only. These relationships and their impact need to be considered by, and discussed with, prospective donors. Only then will the donor and no merely his donation be responded to. Discussion of all the issues is essential if the principle of informed consent is to have any meaning. The reports of the Committees of Inquiry that have been set up in various parts of the world (as they related to the psychosocial aspects of semen donation) are reviewed. They, along with this paper, suggests that a comprehensive service needs to be provided for semen donors and this must include consideration of the psychosocial issues. Suggestions regarding such a service are made.
33. Daniels KR. Semen donors in New Zealand: their characteristics and attitudes. Clinical Reproduction and Fertility. 1987;5(4):177-90.
survey, NZ, donors, attitudes, characteristics, altruism, payment, infertility, anonymity, telling the child, guidelines, policies, psychosocial,: survey, NZ, donors, attitudes, characteristics, altruism, payment, infertility, anonymity, telling the child, guidelines, policies, psychosocial,.
37 donors in 6 NZ programmes surveyed. Major reason for donaint altruism but financial considerations were a factor for almost a quarter. Attitudes of donors differs from those of professionals re payment. Personal knowledge of infertile couples a factor for one quarter. Wide variation re number of times donors asked to donate - guidelines of RNZCOG. Donors almost equally divided on child's right to know nature of conception. Almost quarter would still donate if could be identifiable in future. 39% expressed interest in knowing outcomes. Policy implications are that the psychosocial needs of donors should be taken into account in policy and practice.
34. Daniels K. "Surrogacy": Issues and implications for Society. Presented at the New Zealand Law Conference 1987 1987.
legal, surrogacy, ethics, family, records, childrens rights, social attitudes, rights, NZ: legal, surrogacy, ethics, family, records, childrens rights, social attitudes, rights, NZ.
A discussion of the legal issues surrounding surrogacy as a public rather than private issue. It addresses issues of conflict resolution, childrens rights, commercialisation, the potential for exploitation, access issues and the integrity of public records.
35. Daniels KR. Artificial insemination using donor semen and the issue of secrecy: the views of donors and recipient couples. Social Science and Medicine. 1988;27(4):377-83.
donor insemination, secrecy, legal, psychosocial, children, rights: donor insemination, secrecy, legal, psychosocial, children, rights.
A report on two studies which gathered donors and recipient couples opinions on issues of secrecy as regard to whether DI children should know about their conception or have access to identifying or non-identifying information about their genetic fathers. This information is compared to a similar Australian survey and psychosocial, legal and moral implications associated with this issue are discussed.
36. Daniels KR. Semen donors: their motivations and attitudes to their offspring. Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology. 1989;7(2):121-127.
Australian donors: Australian donors.
37. Daniels KR. Psychosocial Factors in Couples Awaiting In Vitro Fertilisation. Social Work and Society. 1990;14(2):81-98.
This paper reviews the literature on the psychological and psychosocial aspects of in vitro fertilisation, and of consumer attitudes towards IVF. A study of the psychosocial factors reported by 61 couples who were awaiting IVF treatment in Auckland, New Zealand is presented. Results cover demograpgic characteristics, couples responses to infertility, dicision making regarding IVF, the impact of infertility on self and relationships, availability and use of counselling, expected problems associated with IVF treatment and attitudes trowards policy and ethical issues. Discussion of the results includes some implications for social work services.
38. Daniels KR. Counselling - the private and public components. British Infertility Counselling Newsletter. 1990;3:9-11.
infertility counselling, psychosocial: infertility counselling, psychosocial.
39. Daniels K. Attitudes to donor insemination and in vitro fertilisation - a community perspective. Social Work and Society. 1990(6 June - 25 July, 1990):4-10.
social attitudes sonor insemination, IVF, psycho social, legal, ethics, policy, NZ, Australia: social attitudes sonor insemination, IVF, psycho social, legal, ethics, policy, NZ, Australia.
This paper reports the results of a magazine questionnaire which resulted in 1400 replies. The results show a high degree of support for couples being allowed to use DI and IVF and indicate a degree of concern for psychosocial, legal, policy, ethical and medical isssues. Most respondents believed there was some need for legislation or rules to control this area. The results of this survey are compared with an Australian one.
40. Danks D. Genetic considerations. In: Wood C, Leeton J, Kovacs G, eds. Artificial insemination by donor. Melbourne: Brown, Prior and Anderson; 1980.
donors, informations, outcomes, abnormalities: donors, informations, outcomes, abnormalities.
entry not yet complete.41. David A, Avidan D. Artificial insemination donor: clinical and psychological aspects. Fertility and Sterility. 1976;27:528.
42. David G, Price WS. Human Artificial Insemination and Semen Preservation. New York: Plenum; 1980.
43. Demack AG. Report of the Special Committee Appointed by the Queensland Government to Enquire into the Laws Relating to Artificial Insemination, In Vitro Fertilization and Other Related Matters.: State of Queensland, Australia; 1984.
44. Dewar J. Fathers in law? The case of AID. In: Lee R, Morgan D, eds. Birthrights: Law and Ethics at the Beginnings of Life. London: Routledge; 1989.
45. Dixon RE, Buttram VC. Artificial insemination using donor semen: a review of 171 cases. Fertility and Sterility. 1976;27(2):130-134.
46. EckMenning B. Infertility: A Guide for the Childless Couple. New Jersey, USA: Prentice-Hall Inc.; 1977.
parenthood, infertility, support groups, counselling, psychosocial, grief, sexuality couples, doctors, medical aspects: parenthood, infertility, support groups, counselling, psychosocial, grief, sexuality couples, doctors, medical aspects.
This US guide for infertile couples looks at both medical and psychosocial aspects of infertility. In the latter aspect it looks at social attitudes to infertility, grief, sexuality alternatives to childbearing and means of support.
47. EckMenning B. The emotional needs of infertile couples. Fertility and Sterility. 1980;34:313-19.
infertility: infertility.
48. EckMenning B. Donor insemination: the psychosocial issues. Contemporary Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1981;18:155-72.
psychosocial, donor insemination, couples, stress, infertility: psychosocial, donor insemination, couples, stress, infertility.
Technology has made it possible for many infertile couples to have children. Technology has not, however, provided the answers to the emotional and psychology problems of those contemplating DI. The author explores the many issues involved.
49. Edelmann RJ, Connolly KJ. The Counselling Needs of Infertile Couples. Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology. 1987;5:63-70.
counselling, couples, infertility: counselling, couples, infertility.
This study of 843 infertile couples by postal questionnaire found out that a third of couples felt they needed more psychological support and guidance, and that there weren't any correlations between this perceived need and medical factors. There was a correlation, however, between anxiety over infertility and the people saying they would welcome the offer to join support groups.
50. Editorial. Artificial insemination (donor). British Medical Journal. 1975;4(5987):2-3.
policy, psychosocial, donors, recruitment, recipients, secrecy, outcomes, infertility: policy, psychosocial, donors, recruitment, recipients, secrecy, outcomes, infertility.
A brief discussion of many practical and other issues in connection with DI. Expresses concern about source of donors. Also emphasises the need for absolute secrecy.51. Editorial. Artificial insemination for all? British Medical Journal. 1979;2:458.
Donor insemination, psychosocial, recipients, donors, recruitment, access, policy, guidelines, UK, medical issues, couple screening,: Donor insemination, psychosocial, recipients, donors, recruitment, access, policy, guidelines, UK, medical issues, couple screening,.
This editorial presents an overview of the contemporary situation with regard to DI in the UK. It looks at its' geographical availability, its success rate, medical complications arising from it, screening of couples, and issues of funding.
52. Edvinsson A, Forsman L, Milson I, Nordfors G. Givarinsemination vid Manlig Infertilitet: Slut pa en Epok? [Donor insemination for male infertility: The end of an era?]. Lkartidningen. 1990;87:1871-1872.
53. Ericsson HL, Liedholm P. Limited number of donors - a consequence of Sweden's new insemination act. Nord Med. 1986;101(2):56-57.
donors, legislation, Sweden: donors, legislation, Sweden.
54. Ewerlf G. Artificial insemination - legislation and debate. Current Sweden. 1985(329).
Sweden, donors, legislation, anonymity, tracing, recruitment: Sweden, donors, legislation, anonymity, tracing, recruitment.
This report summarises the report of the Insemination committees report which resulted in legislation being passed which made guaranteed DI offspring access to the identity of their biological fathers. It lists the recommendations of the report in regards to various groups having access to DI and under what conditions. It notes that the report favoured IVF for couples and tolerated unpaid surrogacy. It denies that having children is a universal human right.
55. Fellner CH, Marshall JR. Twelve kidney donors. JAMA. 1968;206(12):2703-2707.
kidney donors, altruism, decision,ethics: kidney donors, altruism, decision,ethics.
This study of twelve kidney donors found that the decision making process of donors did not follow the required pattern of informed consent. The prevalent idea that donors receive nothing from being donors is also brought into question by this study in that the donors found that the experience, while disruptive, was a positive and integrating.
56. Feversham C. Report of the Departmental Committee on Human Artificial Insemination: London: HMSO; 1960.
57. Fidell LS, Marik J. Paternity by Proxy: Artificial Insemination with Donor Sperm. In: Offerman-Zuckerberg J, ed. Gender in Transition: A New Frontier. New York: Plenum; 1989.
semen donor, donor insemination,: semen donor, donor insemination,.
entry not complete - photocopy of chapter in filing cabinet under Fidell & Marik.
58. Finegold WJ. Artificial Insemination. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C Thomas; 1964.
history, animal husbandry, indications, physiology, couples, donors, recruitment, payment, tehcniques, consent, husband, law, religion, psychology, cases, recipients, public, secrecy, medical issues: history, animal husbandry, indications, physiology, couples, donors, recruitment, payment, tehcniques, consent, husband, law, religion, psychology, cases, recipients, public, secrecy, medical issues.
Medic's account of his DI practice and views about appropriate practice. This book has 12 chapters, one of which is devoted to looking at what kind of couples and donors are suitable. Very interesting for its views on the need for secrecy. Has a high opinion of donors, but insists on paying them.
59. Finegold WJ. The couple - the donor. Artificial Insemination. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C Thomas; 1964.
recruitment, donors, recipients, screening, payment, selection: recruitment, donors, recipients, screening, payment, selection.
This chapter of the book Artificial Insemination is devoted to looking at what kind of couples and donors are suitable. Very interesting for its views on the need for secrecy. Has a high opinion of donors, but insists on paying them.
60. Fox RC, Swazey JP. The Courage to Fail. A Social View of Organ Transplants and Dialysis. Chicago: Chicago University Press; 1978.
organ transplantation: organ transplantation.
.61. Frankel MS. Cryobanking of human sperm. Journal of Medical Ethics. 1975;1(1):36-38.
medical, social, sperm banks, consent, payment, commerical banks, policy, ethics: medical, social, sperm banks, consent, payment, commerical banks, policy, ethics.
This brief essay looks at some of the medical and social uses of sperm banking. Examines issues of consent and commercialisation.
62. Glezerman M. Two hundred and seventy cases of artificial donor insemination: management and results. Fertility and Sterility. 1981;35(2):180-187.
63. Glover Jcea. Fertility and the family. The Glover Report on Reproductive Technologies to the European Commission.: London: The Fourth Estate; 1989.
64. Guttmacher AF, Haman JO, MacLeod J. The use of donors for artificial insemination. A survey of current practices. Fertility & Sterility. 1950;1(3):264-270.
donors, attitudes, selection, Donor insemination, practice, medical, technique, doctors: donors, attitudes, selection, Donor insemination, practice, medical, technique, doctors.
A report of the results of a survey of 96 practitioners. Covers doctor's attitudes to DI, practice and technique, donor selection etc.
65. Guttmacher AF. Artificial Insemination. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 1962;97:623-631.
66. Hagenfeldt K. Givarinsemination: Behandlingsmetod i Kris [Donor insemination: A treatment in crisis]. Lkartidningen. 1990;87:1849-1850.
67. Haimes E. Secrecy: what can artificial reproduction learn from adoption? International Journal of Law and the Family. 1988;2:46-61.
secrecy, donor insemination, adoption, infertility, family: secrecy, donor insemination, adoption, infertility, family.
68. Handelsman DJ, Dunn SM, Conway AJ, Boylan LM, Jansen RP. Psychological and attitudinal profiles in donors for artificial insemination. Fertility and Sterility. 1985;43(1):95-101.
attitudes, motivations, information, outcomes, disclosure, anonymity, altruism, financial, demographics, withdrawal: attitudes, motivations, information, outcomes, disclosure, anonymity, altruism, financial, demographics, withdrawal.
Studies 30 consecutive new volunteers and 45 established donors using the Cattell 16PF personality profile and an attitudinal survey. Donors differed from general population norms and this seemed to reflect their self-selection as donors. The predominant motive for donation was altruism, but secondary motives were common. Financial motivation very low, few students in the population. Donors approved of all current and most hypothetical uses of their sperm but wanted disclosure of information of non-identifying nature only to other participants. Unmarried donors more likely motivated for nonaltruistic reasons and more in favour of disclosures. Attitudes of donors stable over 3 years but increasing minority envisaged circumstances that might lead to their withdrawal.
69. House JS, Kahn RL. Measures and concepts of social support. In: Cohen S, Syme SL, eds. Social Support and Health. London: Academic Press; 1985.
social support, psychosocial: social support, psychosocial.
70. Huerre P. Psychological aspects of semen donation. In: David G, Price WS, eds. Human artificial insemination and semen preservation. New York: Plenum; 1980.
semen donors, recruitment, partners, demographics, France, CECOS, motivation, infertility, secrecy, psychosocial, offspring, gift, payment, recipients: semen donors, recruitment, partners, demographics, France, CECOS, motivation, infertility, secrecy, psychosocial, offspring, gift, payment, recipients.
describes recruitment method - mainly through couples waiting for DI - and types of men recruited. Goes into some depth over quite complex motivations in some cases, but only anecdotal rather than quantitative data. Describes requirements for wife's consent and type of men preferred.71. Hull MGR, Glazener C, Kelley N, et al. Population study of causes, treatment and outcome of infertility. British Medical Journal. 1985;291:1693-7.
medical, infertility: medical, infertility.
incomplete entry.
72. Hummel WP, Talbert LM. Current management of a donor insemination program. Fertility and Sterility. 1989;51(6):919-929.
DI practice, recruitment, donors, recipients, matching, screening, selection, payment, single women, guidelines, students, history, techniques: DI practice, recruitment, donors, recipients, matching, screening, selection, payment, single women, guidelines, students, history, techniques.
Describes the mainly medical aspects of DI with a few brief paragraphs about ethics and legal issues at the end. Chiefly concerned with reducing the risk of diseases being transmitted to woman and offspring from semen. Does not mention information sharing, but raises the issue of payment of donors - payment should not be high enough to be the main motivation, only reimbursement of expenses or for inconvenience of donating. Main reason for this is that high payments would encourage donors to give false information about medical history etc.
73. Humphrey M, Humphrey H. Families with a Difference: Varieties of Surrogate Parenthood. London: Routledge; 1988.
74. Jalbert P, Leonard C, Selva J, David G. Genetic aspects of artificial insemination with donor semen: the French CECOS Federation guidelines. American Journal of Medical Genetics. 1989;33:269-275.
75. Johnston I. The donor. In: Wood C, Leeton J, Kovacs G, eds. Artificial Insemination by Donor. Melbourne: Brown Prior Andersen; 1980.
Recruitment, selection, screening, outcomes, donors, Australia: Recruitment, selection, screening, outcomes, donors, Australia.
76. Joyce DN. Recruitment, selection and matching of donors. In: al. MBe, ed. Artificial Insemination: Proceedings of the 4th study group of the Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists. London: RCOG; 1976.
donors, recruitment, screening, selection, matching, medical aspects, administration: donors, recruitment, screening, selection, matching, medical aspects, administration.
This article discusses the advisability of recruiting donors from various sectors of the public. It promotes the ideas of genetic screening of donors and of matching the characteristics of the family as closely as possible with that of the donor.
77. Joyce DN. The implications of greater openness concerning AID. AID and After: Papers from BAAF, BASW, and a Scottish Working Party. London: British Agencies for Adoption and Fostering; 1984.
adoption, DI, secrecy, openness,: adoption, DI, secrecy, openness,.
entry incomplete - held on Ken's shelves.
78. Kaiser DS. Artificial insemination: donor rights in situations involving unmarried recipients. Journal of Family Law. 1987-8;26:793-811.
legal rights, donors, single women, legal father, regulation, US, social attitudes: legal rights, donors, single women, legal father, regulation, US, social attitudes.
The current shift away from the traditional family unit suggests that more creative and innovative parenting situations will continue to arise. The laws of all fifty states must recognize these alternate styles and keep pace with the demands of modern ARTs. . ..to guarantee that the best interests of children so conceived will be served, it is vital for state legislatures to act in accordance with the concerns set out in this article.
79. Keye WR. Psychosexual responses to infertility. Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1984;27(3):760-766.
infertility, psychosexual, counselling: infertility, psychosexual, counselling.
This article provides advise to clinicians about the psychosocial and psychosexual feelings, responses and concerns which couples have at various stages of ART treatment.
80. Kovacs GT, Clayton CE, McGowan P. The attitudes of semen donors. Clinical Reproduction and Fertility. 1983;2(1):397-399.
attitudes, anonymity, information, motivation, demographics, donors, offspring, tracing, records: attitudes, anonymity, information, motivation, demographics, donors, offspring, tracing, records.
No abstract provided but paper very short. 25 current donors surveyed, ages given and marital status but not occupations. Sixteen felt they would donate without payment, the others said they would not mind but would be less motivated. 8 donors said they would donate even if their name was released to parents; 13 would not and 4 not sure. 12 donors felt that they may donate even if the offpsring could contact them when a legal adult. Authors conclude that at present anonymity cannot be removed if DI services are to continue.81. Lalos A, Lalos O, Jacobsson L, VonSchoultz B. A Psychosocial Characterization of Infertile Couples before Surgical Treatment of the Female. Journal of Pyschosomatic Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 1986;5:197-206.
female infertility, psychological, stress, couples,: female infertility, psychological, stress, couples,.
This study utilises interviews, Eysenck Personality Inventories and symptom checklists to ascertain the emotional and social impact of infertility on 30 women with tubal damage and their 29 men. The couples expressed grief, depression, guilt, and feelings of inferiority and isolation as a result of their infertility. The women admitted to more symptoms than the men, marital relationships were often affected particularly sexual relations, informal networks were found to offer inadequate support, and all respondents expressed a need for more professional support and counselling.
82. Lasker JN, Borg S. Secrecy and the new reproductive technologies. In: Whiteford LM, Poland ML, eds. New Approaches to Human Reproduction: Social and Ethical Dimensions. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.; 1989.
secrecy, infertility, male: secrecy, infertility, male.
83. Learner E. The social and psychological implications of donor sperm and ova. Presented at the Ethical implications in the use of donor sperm, eggs and embryos in the treatment of human infertility.; Melbourne; 1983.
assisted reproduction, psychosocial, counselling, health professionals, couples, donors, family, social attitudes, secrecy: assisted reproduction, psychosocial, counselling, health professionals, couples, donors, family, social attitudes, secrecy.
This speech looks at the implications of the use of donor sperm and ova for the couples, healthy family development, and the donors. It looks at the role of the medical profession, social attitudes to donation, and donor attitudes to giving out information about themeselves and having future contact with the offspring.
84. Leavy RL. Social support and psychological disorder: a review. Journal of Community Psychology. 1983;11:3-21.
85. Leeton J, Backwell J. A preliminary psychosocial follow-up of parents and their children conceived by artificial insemination by donor (AID). Clinical Reproduction and Fertility. 1982;1:307-310.
not yet complete: not yet complete.
86. Leeton J. The Use of Donor Sperm in the Management of Male Infertility in Australia. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 1988;28:324-326.
Australia, history, donors, social attitudes, DI, selection, assessment, recipients, counselling, screening, psychosocial, demographics, consent, techniques, results, legislation, social father: Australia, history, donors, social attitudes, DI, selection, assessment, recipients, counselling, screening, psychosocial, demographics, consent, techniques, results, legislation, social father.
This article outlines the current practices of DI in Australia and looks at social attitudes to various aspects of this. It supports counselling for both donors and couples, sees DI as being quite differnt from adoption and can see no reason for screening couples. It contends that donors shoould be able to get information about successful pregnancies, and that offspring and couples should be able to get non-identifying information about donors.
87. L¿vset J. Artificial Insemination: The Attitudes of Patients in Norway. Fertility & Stertility. 1951;2(5):415-429.
88. Lusk J. The Importance of Children Having Knowledge about Their Parents. In: Bruce N, Mitchell A, Priestley K, eds. Truth and the Child: A Contribution to the Debate on the Warnock Report. Edinburgh: Family Care; 1988.
89. Mahlstedt PP. The psychological component of infertility. Fertility and Sterility. 1985;443(3):335-46.
infertility case studies, psychosocial, intrapsychic, relationship, stigma, couples, sexuality, counselling, support: infertility case studies, psychosocial, intrapsychic, relationship, stigma, couples, sexuality, counselling, support.
This article looks at the social and psychological aspects infertility, and in particular loss, depression, grief, self esteem and sexuality issues . It discusses relationships between infertile couples and the stigma of infertility and looks at why the psychological components of infertility have been downplayed, and what can doctors can do to help.
90. Mahlstedt PP, Greenfeld DA. Assisted reproductive technology with donor gametes: the need for patient preparation. Fertility and Sterility. 1989;52(6):908-14.
.91. Marwick C. Artificial insemination faces regulation, testing of donor semen, other measures. JAMA. 1988;260:1339-1340.
regulation, screening, donors, semen, US, DI, practice: regulation, screening, donors, semen, US, DI, practice.
Discusses moves to tighten controls on DI - especially testing of semen.
92. Mascola L, Guinan ME. Screening to reduce transmission of sexually transmitted diseases in semen used for artificial insemination. New England Journal of Medicine. 1986;341:1354-1359.
screening, disease, DI, donors, semen: screening, disease, DI, donors, semen.
93. Matthews CD. Artificial insemination - donor and husband. In: al. Pe, ed. The Infertile Couple: Churchill Livingstone; 1980.
donor, recipients, selection, screening, techniques, outcomes, AIH, DI, ethics: donor, recipients, selection, screening, techniques, outcomes, AIH, DI, ethics.
discussion of common concerns about DI, moral etc.; semen technology, selection of donors and recipients, procedures, results of treatment, AIH.
94. Mauss M. The Gift: Forms and Functions of Exchange in Archaic Societies. Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press; 1954.
The gift, society, reciprocity, giver, receiver, anthropology, theory: The gift, society, reciprocity, giver, receiver, anthropology, theory.
95. McCartney CF, Wada CY. Gender Differences in Counseling Needs During Infertility Treatment. In: Stotland NL, ed. Psychiatric Aspects of Reproductive Technology. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press; 1990.
gender, counselling, infertility, reproductive technologies: gender, counselling, infertility, reproductive technologies.
This is a study of 269 women who had been associated with an infertility clinic and 217 men who were their partners. It was discovered that while men and women often had similar reactions to infertility the timing of these reactions and their intensity was often different. It notes that women see more relationship stress arising from infertility than men and are more likely to seek counselling.
96. McDermott P. Sperm donors - a breed apart. The Australian Women's Weekly; 1988.
97. McGowan MP, Baker HW, Kovacs GT, Rennie G. Selection of high fertility donors for artificial insemination programmes. Clinical Reproduction and Fertility. 1983;2(4):269-274.
sperm quality, selection, donors, pregnancy rates, medical, frozen sperm: sperm quality, selection, donors, pregnancy rates, medical, frozen sperm.
Studied outcomes of donations by 177 donors selected for good sperm quality. Compared most fertile 25 with least fertile 25 and found the only significant difference was sperm morphology. Conclude that using more stringent criteria for selection of donors on basis of sperm morphology and discarding donors who do not produce pregnancies within 12 cycles should improve overall pregnancy rates.
98. McMichael A. Social Aspects. In: Wood C, Leeton J, Kovacs G, eds. Artificial Insemination by Donor. Melbourne: Brown Prior Andersen; 1980.
Australia, Donor insemination, couples, doctors, social workers, psychosocial, stress: Australia, Donor insemination, couples, doctors, social workers, psychosocial, stress.
This chapter looks at issues of social work and DI in Australia, couple selection and criteria for this, and the psychological components of infertility for couples. It presents a study of 50 DI couples describing, their demographic characteristics the psychological issues they faced, and the nature and duration of their marriages. It then raises questions about the roles practitioners can and do play in assisting DI couples.
99. McWhinnie AM. Annex: The Case for Greater Openness Concerning AID. AID and After: Papers from BAAF, BASW and a Scottish Working Party. London: British Agencies for Adoption and Fostering; 1984.
100. Miall C. The stigma of involuntary childlessness. Social Problems. 1986;33:268-82.
infertility, stigma, society, deviance: infertility, stigma, society, deviance.
.101. Mitchell GD. Family Making by AID. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy. 1982;2:69-74.
DI offspring, secrecy, family functioning: DI offspring, secrecy, family functioning.
102. Monteiro E, Spencer RC, Barratt CLR, Cooke S, Cooke ID. Sexually transmitted disease in potential semen donors. British Medical Journal. 1987;295(15 Aug):418.
donors, screening, demographic, sexually transmitte disease, HIV, UK: donors, screening, demographic, sexually transmitte disease, HIV, UK.
A study of urethral and secological evidence of infection in a group of potential semen donors.
103. Murray TH. Gifts of the Body and the Needs of Strangers. Hastings Center Report. 1987;17(2):30-38.
gift, biomedicine, theory, ethics, altruism, blood, organs, social values: gift, biomedicine, theory, ethics, altruism, blood, organs, social values.
Relationships governed by markets keep moral and social dimensions to a bare minimum. Gifts, by their open-endedness, defy such minimalisation. Impersonal gifts, such as blood or body parts or charity may not regulate relationships between specific individuals, buth they serve other functions by regulating larger relationships and honoring important human values, precisely those threatened by massive and impersonal bureaucracies.
104. National Bioethics Consultative Committee. Access to Information: An Analogy between Adoption and the Use of Gamete Donation. (Background Paper prepared for the Committee and Appendix to the Report of the Committee (1991): Commonwealth of Australia; 1988.
105. National Bioethics Consultative Committee. Issues Paper on Infertility Counselling. Australia: N.B.C.C.; 1990.
106. New Zealand. Status of Children Amendment Act. New Zealand; 1987.
107. Nicholas MK, Tyler JPP. Characteristics, attitudes and personalities of AI donors. Clinical Reproduction and Fertility. 1983;2(1):389-396.
semen donors, attitudes, personality, Australia, payment, altruism, motivation, demographics, recruitment, blood: semen donors, attitudes, personality, Australia, payment, altruism, motivation, demographics, recruitment, blood.
First 50 men recruited assessed for attitudes and characteristics. aimed to compare them with a group of blood donors. Results show that donors are stable and moderately extroverted and from wide range of occupations. Their marital and parental status had no particular relationship to their desire to donate and most did so for altruistic reasons. Most lived close to clinic and preferred to donate during normal working hours. The inconvenience of doanting appeared to be the most important factor in considering new approaches to recruiting semen donors.
108. Nijs P, Rouffa L. A.I.D.-Couples: psychological and psychopathological evaluation. Andrologia. 1975;7(3):187-194.
not yet complete: not yet complete.
109. Nijs P, Steeno O, Steppe A. Evaluation of AID donors: Medical and pyshcological aspects. A preliminary report. In: David G, Price WS, eds. Human artificial insemination and semen preservation. New York: Plenum; 1980.
donors, partner, demographics, characteristics, motivation, screening, psychosocial, recruitment, decision to donate, altruism, gift, anonymity, payment, informed consent, maturity, psychological indications and contra-indications: donors, partner, demographics, characteristics, motivation, screening, psychosocial, recruitment, decision to donate, altruism, gift, anonymity, payment, informed consent, maturity, psychological indications and contra-indications.
Paper outlines a preliminary report of the psycho-pathological evaluation of 27 donors. Results presented and then recommendations made regarding the positive and negative psychological indications. Where donors wa married, both donor and wife were interviewed.
110. Novaes S. Giving, Receiving, Repaying: Gamete Donors and Donor Policies in Reproductive Medicine. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. 1989;5:639-657.
donors, donor insemination, IVF, gift, policy, recipients, kinship: donors, donor insemination, IVF, gift, policy, recipients, kinship.
Analyses current donor recruitment in the light of Marcel Mauss' essay on the gift. Donor policies seem primarily designed to spare infertile recipients the obligation to recognize the donor's contribution, thus avoiding the kinship issues that they raise. Questions relating meaning of donation, social recognition of donors' role and clarification of the kinship issues are essential in order to establish the social legitemacy of fertilisation procedures using donated gametes.111. Office of Technology Assessment. Infertility: Medical and Social Choices. Washington, DC: US Congress; 1988.
112. Office of Technology Assessment. Artificial Insemination practice in the United States. In: Congress US, ed. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.; 1988#.
113. Paul J, Durna E. Attitudes of sperm donors. Oral presentation at the Fertility Society of Australia's Annual Conference, 12th November, 1987.; 1987.
114. Polkinghorne JC. Review of the guidance on the research use of fetuses and fetal material.: HMSO, UK; 1989.
115. Raymond JG. Reproductive gifts and gift giving: the altruistic woman. Hastings Centre Report. 1990;Nov/Dec:7-11.
gender, gift, altruism, commercialism, policy, law, surrogacy, gametes, donation, social attitudes: gender, gift, altruism, commercialism, policy, law, surrogacy, gametes, donation, social attitudes.
This article focusses on the differences between voluntary and commercial egg donation and surrogacy, and differences in social attitudes to male and female altruism and self-interest, and the altruism expected of different members of family groups. It looks at this in relation to public policy which often assumes that these sort of donations occur in a gender neutral context.
116. Rosenkvist H. Donor insemination. Danish Medical Bulletin. 1981;28(4):133-148.
entry not complete: entry not complete.
117. Rothman BK. On Surrogacy. Constructing Social Policy. In: Offerman-Zuckerberg J, ed. Gender in Transition: A New Frontier. N.Y.: Plenum; 1989.
surrogacy, law, commercialisation, commodification, women, children, ethics, policy: surrogacy, law, commercialisation, commodification, women, children, ethics, policy.
This article argues that the gestational mother should be the legal mother of the child, and that unless selling babies becomes legalised this means that commercial surrogacy should be illegal and that non-commercial surrogacy should be treated in the same way as adoption. It looks at ethical and social policy issues and sresses the dangers inherent in surrogacy to the gestational mothers and to society in general.
118. Rowland R, Ruffin C. Community attitudes to artificial insemination by husband or donor, in vitro fertilization and adoption. Clinical Reproduction and Fertility. 1983;2:35.
119. Rowland R. Attitudes and opinions of donors on an artificial insemination by donor (AID) programme. Clinical Reproduction and Fertility. 1984;2(4):249-59.
attitudes, donors, motivation, demographics, information, offspring, payment, tracing, secrecy, anonymity, Australia: attitudes, donors, motivation, demographics, information, offspring, payment, tracing, secrecy, anonymity, Australia.
Presents data from a study of 67 donors at Queen Victoria Hospital, Melbourne. Questionnaires and structured interviews. Data reveal some stereotypes about semen donors not valid; they do not donate primarily for monetary reasons and they are not only medical students. Majority would not object if informaiton about them, apart from their name, were given to the couple for the child, and over half would not mind meeting the child at the age of 18. Argues that legislation would need to take into account donors' viewpoints, and that a system could be designed to accommodate all the varied needs of couples, donors, and offspring.
120. Rowland R. The social and psychological consequences of secrecy in artificial insemination by donor (AID) programmes. Social Science and Medicine. 1985;21:391-396.
secrecy, offspring, infantalising, psychosocial, DI, policy, practice, recipients, donors, Australia: secrecy, offspring, infantalising, psychosocial, DI, policy, practice, recipients, donors, Australia.
.121. Rubin B. Psychological Aspects of Human Artificial Insemination. Archives of General Psychiatry. 1965;13(Aug.):121-132.
entry incomplete: entry incomplete.
122. Rubin S. A Spermdonor Baby Grows Up. In: Zimmerman J, ed. The Technological Woman: Interfacing with Tomorrow. New York: Praeger; 1983.
donors, offspring, anonymity, telling the child, secrecy, regulation, sperm banks, payment, family: donors, offspring, anonymity, telling the child, secrecy, regulation, sperm banks, payment, family.
This article is the account by a DI offspring, of what she thinks about DI practice, and how she feels about being the product of DI. She is disapproving of her inability to gain access to her biological father, the law which allows this , her parents for witholding the information from her for thirty years and DI as a practice as such.
123. Salzer LP. Infertility: How Couples Can Cope. Boston, USA: G.K. Hall and Co.; 1986#.
124. Sauer MV, Gorrill MJ, Zeffer KB, Bustillo M. Attitudinal survey of sperm donors to an artificial insemination clinic. Journal of Reproductive Medicine. 1989;34(5):362-4.
donors, attitudes, motivation, payment, anonymity, register, altruism, blood, organs, US: donors, attitudes, motivation, payment, anonymity, register, altruism, blood, organs, US.
42 donors survey to ascertain motivations and attitudes. Donors motivated by money, with 69% unwilling to participate if money withdrawn. Anonymity desired and did not favour a national registry tracking insemination outcomes. Although perceived as altruistic by peers, donors did not see themselves in this way and most considered donating semen as similar to donating blood or organs.
125. Schoysman R. Problems of selecting donors for artificial insemination. Journal of Medical Ethics. 1975;1(1):34-35.
selection, donors, payment, students, partner, recruitment, number of donations, outcomes, information sharing, known donor, Europe: selection, donors, payment, students, partner, recruitment, number of donations, outcomes, information sharing, known donor, Europe.
Paper concerned with only one aspect of donor selection: that of finding 'suitable' donors. In general students have been used but Schoysman outlines other possible sources and how to go about attracting other men to donate. Talks about issue of payment, and information sharing and known donors.
126. Schroeder-Jenkins M, Rothmann SA. Causes of donor rejection in a sperm banking program. Fertility and Sterility. 1989;51(5):903-906.
127. Seibel MM, Taymor ML. Emotional aspects of infertility. Fertility and Sterility. 1982;37(2):137-145.
infertility, psyological, sexual, social, methodological: infertility, psyological, sexual, social, methodological.
128. Selva J, Leonard C, Albert M, Auger J, David G. Genetic screening for artificial insemination by donor (AID). Clinical Genetics. 1986;29:389-396.
potential semen donors, France, genetic screening: potential semen donors, France, genetic screening.
Reports results of 10 years of experience at the CECOS centre in Paris-Bicetre. A total of 676 potential donors were interviewed by the geneticist and karyotyped and 6% were excluded. Experience stresses the subjectivity and difficulty of the exclusion decision and the usefulness of taking into account the recipient's familial pathology when choosing the donor. Finally, it reveals the importance of the geneticist's participation in the functioning of the centre.
129. Shapiro CH. The Impact of Infertility on the Marital Relationship. Social Casework. 1982(September):387-393.
psychosocial, infertility crisis: psychosocial, infertility crisis.
130. Singer P, Wells D. The Reproduction Revolution: New Ways of Making Babies. Oxford: O.U.P.; 1984.
.131. Snowden R, Mitchell GD. The Artificial Family: A Consideration of Artificial Insemination by Donor. London: George Allen and Unwin; 1981.
132. Snowden R, Mitchell GD, Snowden EM. Artificial Reproduction: A Social Investigation. London: George Allen and Unwin; 1983.
entry not yet complete: entry not yet complete.
133. Snowden R, Snowden EM. The Gift of a Child. London: George Allen and Unwin.; 1984.
entry incomplete: entry incomplete.
134. Spiers J. Children's Rights to Know Their Identity: Social Work Perspective. In: Bruce N, Mitchell A, Priestley K, eds. Truth and the Child: A Contribution to the DEbate on the Warnock Report. Edinburgh: Family Care; 1988.
135. Stewart CR, Daniels KR, Boulnois JDH. The development of a psychosocial approach to artificial insemination of donor sperm. New Zealand Medical Journal. 1982;95(December 8):853-6.
Psychosocial, Couples, Assessment, Selection, Counselling, Multidisciplinary teams, Biology,: Psychosocial, Couples, Assessment, Selection, Counselling, Multidisciplinary teams, Biology,.
This paper emerges from the experiences of the author as a member of a multidisciplinary team operating in a hospital based obstetrics and gynaecology unit. This team was trying to develop a model within which the psychosocial assessment of couples applying for AID could be carried out. The paper presents guidelines in five areas which it believes should be considered in the AID assessment process and addresses medical and counselling issues associated with this.
136. Strickler RC, Keller DW, Warren JC. Artificial insemination with fresh donor semen. New England Journal of Medicine. 1975;293(17):848-53.
137. Sverne T. Children conceived by Artificial Insemination. Summary of a report of the Insemination Committee: S.O.U.,; 1983.
138. Sverne T. Bio-technical developments and the law. Changing Family Patterns (UNESCO). 1990;126:465-493.
139. Sweden. Swedish Law on Artificial Insemination, No 1140/1984; 1985.
140. Titmuss RM. The Gift Relationship: From Human Blood to Social Policy. Harmondsworth: Pelican; 1970.
sociological theory, gift, blood, society, altruism, donors, medicine, payment,: sociological theory, gift, blood, society, altruism, donors, medicine, payment,.
This book investigates blood transfusion in a number of industrialised countries and uses the findings to investigate relationships in mass societies. It looks at countries where people are paid for their blood and at those where it is given voluntarily, and investigates the implications of these differences. It also tries to discover who blood donors are in each country and seeks to understand why they donate.141. Triseliotis J. In Search of Origins: The Experiences of Adopted People. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul; 1973.
adoption, tracing, secrecy, openness: adoption, tracing, secrecy, openness.
entry incomplete.
142. United Kingdom. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act. London: HMSO; 1990.
143. Veiel HOF. Dimensions of social support: a conceptual framework for research. Social Psychiatry. 1985;20(4):156-162.
144. Verp MS, Cohen MR, Simpson JL. Necessity of formal genetic screening in artificial insemination by donor. Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 1983;62:474-9.
genetic screening, medical history, donor,: genetic screening, medical history, donor,.
study found that extensive genetic screening probably not necessary provided thorough medical history obtained.
145. Waller L. Interim Report of the Committee to Consider the Social, Ethical and legal Issues Arising from In Vitro Fertilization: State of Victoria, Australia.; 1982.
146. Walters L. Ethics and New Reproductive Technologies: An International Review of Committee Statements. Hastings Center Report. 1987(June):3-9.
guidelines, IVF, surrogacy, family, embryos, research, USA, Germany, ethics, Australia, NZ, UK, Japan, Canada, France, The Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, Catholic, Denmark, Ireland, Norway, Spain, Third World Congress, policy, social attitudes, couples, lesbian, single women, cryopreservation, eugenics, egg donation, ET, law, payment, commercialisation, opennesss, regulation: guidelines, IVF, surrogacy, family, embryos, research, USA, Germany, ethics, Australia, NZ, UK, Japan, Canada, France, The Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, Catholic, Denmark, Ireland, Norway, Spain, Third World Congress, policy, social attitudes, couples, lesbian, single women, cryopreservation, eugenics, egg donation, ET, law, payment, commercialisation, opennesss, regulation.
This paper looks at the responses of various governmental and non-governmenal committees internationally on issues of surrogacy, embryo research, IVF, and embryo research. Is supportive of the value of the contributions of these committees.
147. Warnock M. Report of the Committee of Inquiry into Human Fertilisation and Embryology. In: Security DoHaS, ed. London: H.M.S.O.; 1984.
148. Western Australia LA. Report of the Select Committee appointed to inquire into the Reproductive Tehcnology Working Party's Report.: Western Australia Legislative Assembly; 1988.
149. Wilson A. A Consumer Viewpoint. Presented at the British Infertility Counselling Association Northern Study Day; York District Hospital; 1990.