• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

The 'double track' policy for donor anonymity.

作者信息

Pennings G

机构信息

Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Vakgroep Filosofie, Belgium.

出版信息

Hum Reprod. 1997 Dec;12(12):2839-44. doi: 10.1093/humrep/12.12.2839.

DOI:10.1093/humrep/12.12.2839
PMID:9455865
Abstract

Although there is no evidence that any one policy is the best solution, clinics as well as legislators tend to impose one position about donor anonymity on all participants. The most evident alternative policy is to let the parties decide for themselves. Donors may choose between anonymity or identification and recipients can opt for an anonymous or identifiable donor. This 'double track' policy for anonymity represents the best attempt to balance the rights of donors, recipients and donor offspring. The procedure reflects the plurality of visions and the absence of an independent standard to decide which one is best.

摘要

相似文献

1
The 'double track' policy for donor anonymity.
Hum Reprod. 1997 Dec;12(12):2839-44. doi: 10.1093/humrep/12.12.2839.
2
Genetic databases and the future of donor anonymity.遗传数据库与供体匿名的未来。
Hum Reprod. 2019 May 1;34(5):786-790. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dez029.
3
[Sperm or oocyte donation: the dynamics of making the decision regarding the method and timing of disclosure of information to the sibling].[精子或卵子捐赠:关于向同胞披露信息的方式和时间做出决定的动态过程]
Harefuah. 2009 Apr;148(4):251-5, 275.
4
The end of donor anonymity: how genetic testing is likely to drive anonymous gamete donation out of business.捐赠者匿名制的终结:基因检测如何可能使匿名配子捐赠不再可行。
Hum Reprod. 2016 Jun;31(6):1135-40. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dew065. Epub 2016 Apr 12.
5
Donor insemination programmes with personal donors: issues of secrecy.使用个人捐赠者的供精授精计划:保密问题。
Hum Reprod. 1996 Nov;11(11):2558-63. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a019160.
6
The limits of evidence: evidence based policy and the removal of gamete donor anonymity in the UK.证据的局限:循证政策与英国配子捐赠者匿名制度的废除
Monash Bioeth Rev. 2015 Mar;33(1):29-44. doi: 10.1007/s40592-015-0017-z.
7
Anonymous or known donors? A brief discussion of the psychosocial issues raised by removing anonymity from sperm donors.匿名捐赠者还是已知捐赠者?关于取消精子捐赠者匿名性所引发的社会心理问题的简要讨论。
Hum Fertil (Camb). 2013 Mar;16(1):44-7. doi: 10.3109/14647273.2013.780664.
8
Donor insemination: Dutch parents' opinions about confidentiality and donor anonymity and the emotional adjustment of their children.供精人工授精:荷兰父母对保密和供体匿名性的看法以及他们孩子的情绪调适
Hum Reprod. 1997 Jul;12(7):1591-7. doi: 10.1093/humrep/12.7.1591.
9
Shifting to a model of donor conception that entails a communication agreement among the parents, donor, and offspring.转向一种涉及父母、供体和后代之间沟通协议的供体受孕模式。
BMC Med Ethics. 2022 Mar 4;23(1):18. doi: 10.1186/s12910-022-00756-1.
10
[Attitude and considerations of sperm donors in relation to insemination].[精子捐赠者对人工授精的态度及考虑因素]
Ugeskr Laeger. 1995 Aug 7;157(32):4462-5.

引用本文的文献

1
Legalizing altruistic surrogacy in response to evasive travel? An Icelandic proposal.为应对规避性旅行而使利他代孕合法化?一项冰岛提案。
Reprod Biomed Soc Online. 2017 Feb 20;3:109-119. doi: 10.1016/j.rbms.2016.12.003. eCollection 2016 Dec.
2
Narrative Identity in Third Party Reproduction: Normative Aspects and Ethical Challenges.第三方生殖中的叙事身份:规范层面与伦理挑战。
J Bioeth Inq. 2018 Mar;15(1):57-70. doi: 10.1007/s11673-017-9823-8. Epub 2017 Dec 12.
3
To name or not to name? An overview of the social and ethical issues raised by removing anonymity from sperm donors.
是否要公开捐精者的身份?取消捐精者匿名制所引发的社会和伦理问题概述。
Asian J Androl. 2010 Nov;12(6):801-6. doi: 10.1038/aja.2010.60. Epub 2010 Jul 12.
4
The reduction of sperm donor candidates due to the abolition of the anonymity rule: analysis of an argument.由于匿名规则的废除导致精子捐献候选者数量减少:一项论证分析
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2001 Nov;18(11):617-22. doi: 10.1023/a:1013169207315.