Redhead Caroline A B, Barker Nicola, Fox Marie, Frith Lucy
Manchester Law School, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, United Kingdom.
School of Law and Social Justice, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Hum Fertil (Camb). 2025 Dec;28(1):2493252. doi: 10.1080/14647273.2025.2493252. Epub 2025 May 19.
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 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.
从《沃诺克报告》发布至今已过去一代人的时间,尽管生育领域、法律文化和更广泛的社会发生了重大变化,但它所提议的监管体系在很大程度上仍然完好无损。在本文中,我们追溯沃诺克的遗产,重点关注配子捐赠受孕的背景。借助ConnectedDNA研究项目中的实例,我们分析了沃诺克提议的两个方面——其关于配子捐赠者应保持匿名的建议,以及其关键假设,即只有捐赠者、受赠者和通过捐赠受孕者组成的“三人组”对相互获取信息感兴趣。摒弃捐赠者匿名制以及对沃诺克关于“家庭”含义假设的质疑,体现了沃诺克一个关键目标所固有的挑战:使生育法“适应未来发展”。沃诺克完全没有预见到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。同样,当代对捐赠、家庭、亲属关系和关联性的理解与沃诺克最初的假设存在冲突,因而也与支撑立法框架的原则存在冲突。鉴于此,我们建议对捐赠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,特别是关于捐赠者兄弟姐妹的条款;(2)扩大对受捐赠受孕影响者的咨询和支持条款;(3)切实实施全球十家庭限制。更普遍地说,我们认为对1990年《人类受精与胚胎学法案》的零散改革往往显得相互矛盾,未能应对生育实践的全球性。因此,我们在结论中主张,需要对立法框架进行全面审查,以创建一个符合捐赠受孕群体需求且在21世纪仍适用的法律治理体系。