Warnock and its contested legacy in relation to donor conceived families: the case for regulatory reform.

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Human Fertility Pub Date : 2025-12-01 Epub Date: 2025-05-19 DOI:10.1080/14647273.2025.2493252
Caroline A B Redhead, Nicola Barker, Marie Fox, Lucy Frith
{"title":"Warnock and its contested legacy in relation to donor conceived families: the case for regulatory reform.","authors":"Caroline A B Redhead, Nicola Barker, Marie Fox, Lucy Frith","doi":"10.1080/14647273.2025.2493252","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A generation on from the Warnock Report, the regulatory system it proposed remains largely intact, despite significant changes in the fertility sector, legal culture and wider society. In this article, we trace Warnock's legacy, focusing on the context of gamete donor conception. Drawing on illustrative examples from the ConnectedDNA research project, we analyse two aspects of Warnock's proposals - its recommendation that gamete donors should be anonymous and its key assumption that only the 'triad' of donor, recipient(s) and donor-conceived people have an interest in receiving information about each other. The jettisoning of donor anonymity coupled with a questioning of Warnock's assumptions about the meaning of 'family', illustrate the challenges inherent in a key Warnock objective: to 'future proof' fertility law. Both the global market in gametes and embryos and the accessibility of Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing (DTCGT) technologies were wholly unforeseen by Warnock. Similarly, contemporary understandings of donation, families, kinship and relatedness exist in tension with Warnock's original assumptions and, thus, with the principles underpinning the legislative framework. Given this, we recommend three specific reforms to the regulation of donor conception: (1) an urgent review and reformulation of information-sharing provisions, particularly with regard to donor-siblings; (2) an expansion of counselling and support provisions for those affected by donor conception; and (3) the effective imposition of a global ten-family limit. More generally, we suggest that piecemeal and <i>ad hoc</i> reforms to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 have often appeared contradictory and have failed to grapple with the global nature of fertility practice. Thus, we conclude by arguing that a comprehensive review of the legislative framework is needed to create a system of legal governance which meets the needs of the donor conceived community and remains fit for purpose in the twenty-first century.</p>","PeriodicalId":13006,"journal":{"name":"Human Fertility","volume":"28 1","pages":"2493252"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Fertility","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2025.2493252","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A generation on from the Warnock Report, the regulatory system it proposed remains largely intact, despite significant changes in the fertility sector, legal culture and wider society. In this article, we trace Warnock's legacy, focusing on the context of gamete donor conception. Drawing on illustrative examples from the ConnectedDNA research project, we analyse two aspects of Warnock's proposals - its recommendation that gamete donors should be anonymous and its key assumption that only the 'triad' of donor, recipient(s) and donor-conceived people have an interest in receiving information about each other. The jettisoning of donor anonymity coupled with a questioning of Warnock's assumptions about the meaning of 'family', illustrate the challenges inherent in a key Warnock objective: to 'future proof' fertility law. Both the global market in gametes and embryos and the accessibility of Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing (DTCGT) technologies were wholly unforeseen by Warnock. Similarly, contemporary understandings of donation, families, kinship and relatedness exist in tension with Warnock's original assumptions and, thus, with the principles underpinning the legislative framework. Given this, we recommend three specific reforms to the regulation of donor conception: (1) an urgent review and reformulation of information-sharing provisions, particularly with regard to donor-siblings; (2) an expansion of counselling and support provisions for those affected by donor conception; and (3) the effective imposition of a global ten-family limit. More generally, we suggest that piecemeal and ad hoc reforms to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 have often appeared contradictory and have failed to grapple with the global nature of fertility practice. Thus, we conclude by arguing that a comprehensive review of the legislative framework is needed to create a system of legal governance which meets the needs of the donor conceived community and remains fit for purpose in the twenty-first century.

沃诺克及其与捐助者孕育的家庭有关的争议遗产:监管改革的案例。
在沃诺克报告的一代人之后,尽管生育部门、法律文化和更广泛的社会发生了重大变化,但它提出的监管体系在很大程度上仍然完好无损。在这篇文章中,我们追溯沃诺克的遗产,重点关注配子供体受孕的背景。通过ConnectedDNA研究项目的例子,我们分析了Warnock提案的两个方面——它建议配子捐赠者应该是匿名的,以及它的关键假设,即只有捐赠者、接受者和捐赠者受孕的人有兴趣接收彼此的信息。捐赠者匿名的抛弃,加上对沃诺克关于“家庭”意义的假设的质疑,说明了沃诺克的一个关键目标所固有的挑战:“未来证明”的生育法。配子和胚胎的全球市场以及直接面向消费者的基因检测(DTCGT)技术的可及性都是沃诺克完全没有预料到的。同样,当代对捐赠、家庭、亲属关系和亲缘关系的理解与沃诺克最初的假设存在紧张关系,因此也与支撑立法框架的原则存在紧张关系。鉴于此,我们建议对捐赠者受孕的监管进行三项具体改革:(1)紧急审查和重新制定信息共享条款,特别是关于捐赠者的兄弟姐妹;(2)扩大对受捐赠受孕影响者的咨询和支助规定;(3)全球十户限制的有效实施。更一般地说,我们认为1990年《人类受精和胚胎法》的零星和特别改革经常出现矛盾,并且未能解决生育实践的全球性质。因此,我们最后提出的论点是,需要对立法框架进行全面审查,以建立一种法律管理制度,这种制度既要满足捐助者设想的社区的需要,又要适合二十一世纪的目的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Human Fertility
Human Fertility OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.30%
发文量
50
期刊介绍: Human Fertility is a leading international, multidisciplinary journal dedicated to furthering research and promoting good practice in the areas of human fertility and infertility. Topics included span the range from molecular medicine to healthcare delivery, and contributions are welcomed from professionals and academics from the spectrum of disciplines concerned with human fertility. It is published on behalf of the British Fertility Society. The journal also provides a forum for the publication of peer-reviewed articles arising out of the activities of the Association of Biomedical Andrologists, the Association of Clinical Embryologists, the Association of Irish Clinical Embryologists, the British Andrology Society, the British Infertility Counselling Association, the Irish Fertility Society and the Royal College of Nursing Fertility Nurses Group. All submissions are welcome. Articles considered include original papers, reviews, policy statements, commentaries, debates, correspondence, and reports of sessions at meetings. The journal also publishes refereed abstracts from the meetings of the constituent organizations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信