{"title":"Surplus embryo donation: terminology and ethico-legal perspectives.","authors":"Roy Gilbar, Sivan Tamir","doi":"10.1093/jlb/lsaf009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Numerous cryopreserved surplus embryos are being stored in IVF units in Western countries. IVF patients are required to choose and consent to disposition options for their surplus embryos upon starting treatment. We focus on the option of embryo donation to others for reproductive purposes. The terminology used for this practice is inconsistent, as the term embryo 'donation' is used interchangeably with embryo 'adoption' in different jurisdictions, government programs, and by private initiatives. Our main argument is that the selected terminology bears conceptual and other consequences for public attitudes, in a way which affects the choice of such a surplus embryo-disposition-option. More specifically, we contend that the pairing of 'embryo-adoption' is misguided. We identify material, legal, and policy-related points of distinction between the practices of donation and adoption. Then, we discuss the importance of choosing the <i>right</i> terminology, given its power to influence the perception of embryo donation/adoption, and analyze conceptual differences between the two terms, finding only 'donation' to be fit for purpose. Next, relying on findings from an empirical study, we consider the effect of the <i>non</i>-personhood of the embryo on the appropriateness of each term. Subsequently, we distinguish donation from adoption and justify why the former is more appropriate.</p>","PeriodicalId":56266,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","volume":"12 2","pages":"lsaf009"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12260842/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsaf009","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Numerous cryopreserved surplus embryos are being stored in IVF units in Western countries. IVF patients are required to choose and consent to disposition options for their surplus embryos upon starting treatment. We focus on the option of embryo donation to others for reproductive purposes. The terminology used for this practice is inconsistent, as the term embryo 'donation' is used interchangeably with embryo 'adoption' in different jurisdictions, government programs, and by private initiatives. Our main argument is that the selected terminology bears conceptual and other consequences for public attitudes, in a way which affects the choice of such a surplus embryo-disposition-option. More specifically, we contend that the pairing of 'embryo-adoption' is misguided. We identify material, legal, and policy-related points of distinction between the practices of donation and adoption. Then, we discuss the importance of choosing the right terminology, given its power to influence the perception of embryo donation/adoption, and analyze conceptual differences between the two terms, finding only 'donation' to be fit for purpose. Next, relying on findings from an empirical study, we consider the effect of the non-personhood of the embryo on the appropriateness of each term. Subsequently, we distinguish donation from adoption and justify why the former is more appropriate.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Law and the Biosciences (JLB) is the first fully Open Access peer-reviewed legal journal focused on the advances at the intersection of law and the biosciences. A co-venture between Duke University, Harvard University Law School, and Stanford University, and published by Oxford University Press, this open access, online, and interdisciplinary academic journal publishes cutting-edge scholarship in this important new field. The Journal contains original and response articles, essays, and commentaries on a wide range of topics, including bioethics, neuroethics, genetics, reproductive technologies, stem cells, enhancement, patent law, and food and drug regulation. JLB is published as one volume with three issues per year with new articles posted online on an ongoing basis.