Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37721593›Full record

ArticleJournal of bioethical inquiry2024

An Ethical Examination of Donor Anonymity and a Defence of a Legal Ban on Anonymous Donation and the Establishment of a Central Register.

Xavier Symons, Henry Kha

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of bioethical inquiry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Motherhood, the "blank slate," and the language of surrogacy.Frontiers in global women's health · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Xavier SymonsPlunkett Centre for Ethics, Australian Catholic University, Ice Street, Darlinghurst, NSW, 2010, Australia. xavier_symons@hsph.harvard.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-9495-4395
Henry KhaMacquarie University Law School, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many if not most sperm donors in the early years of IVF donated under conditions of anonymity. There is, however, a growing awareness of the ethical cost of withholding identifying parental information from donor children. Today, anonymous donation is illegal in many jurisdictions, and some jurisdictions have gone as far as retrospectively invalidating contracts whereby donors were guaranteed anonymity. This article provides a critical evaluation of the ethics and legality of anonymous donation. We defend Australian and British legislation that has outlawed donor anonymity, and we argue for the establishment of a central registry that provides donor children with the ability to easily and reliably access identifying information about their donor parents.

Indexed as

ConfidentialityRegistriesTissue DonorsAustraliaHumansMaleParentsSpermatozoaTissue and Organ ProcurementUnited KingdomChildren’s rightsDonor anonymityGamete donationGenealogical bewildermentIVF

Identifiers

PMID37721593

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.