Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42753110›Full record

ArticleJournal of bioethical inquiry2026

The Moral Principles of Gamete Donor Screening.

Laura G Socorro

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of bioethical inquiry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Laura G SocorroThe Australian National University and The Canberra Health Service, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia. laura.socorro@act.gov.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gamete Donation is a widely accepted method which allows for individuals who may be limited by medical, genetic, or social reasons to conceive a child. While the ethics of gamete donation have been widely discussed, no discussion of the ethics of gamete donor screening and the different levels at which it can be understood has previously taken place. This paper discusses gamete donor screening in the context of Australia and proposes that there are three distinct levels to screening: legislation, donor banks, and individual selection. Through an examination of what has been deemed permissible to screen for and against at each level, conclusions are drawn regarding what moral principle is driving selection choices. The moral principles of procreative beneficence, procreative non-maleficence, and procreative justice are useful in understanding the motivations of screening choices at these three tiers. The paper concludes that, at each level of gamete donor screening, the key driving moral principle varies between procreative beneficence, procreative non-maleficence, and procreative justice. Conversations regarding ethical drivers and screening boundaries are important considering advances in reproductive technology. A firm understanding of what is ethically permissible to screen for and against holds the key to mitigating potential future injustices and prejudice rooted in specific traits and populations.

Indexed as

Donor screeningGamete donor screeningGenetic screeningProcreative beneficenceProcreative justiceProcreative non-maleficenceReproductive ethics

Identifiers

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.