Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T06:47:08.539Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part III - Institutionalised Resistance to Openness

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 July 2023

Edited by
Fiona Kelly ,
Deborah Dempsey  and
Adrienne Byrt
Fiona Kelly
Affiliation:
La Trobe University, Victoria
Deborah Dempsey
Affiliation:
Swinburne University of Technology, Victoria
Adrienne Byrt
Affiliation:
Swinburne University of Technology, Victoria
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Donor-Linked Families in the Digital Age
Relatedness and Regulation
 , pp. 209 - 254
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2023

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

11 Siblings Met in Orlando. (2017, January 21). The donor sibling registry. https://donorsiblingregistry.com/success_stories/253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21 CFR § 1271 (2021)Google Scholar
Adams, D. H., Ullah, S., & de Lacey, S. (2016). Does the removal of anonymity reduce sperm donors in Australia? Journal of Law and Medicine, 23(3), 628–636.Google Scholar
Allan, S. (2016). Donor identification: Victorian legislation gives rights to all donor-conceived people. Family Matters, 98, 43–55. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3010387Google Scholar
Appleton, S. F. (2015). Between the binaries: Exploring the legal boundaries of nonanonymous sperm donation. Family Law Quarterly, 49(1), 93–115. www.jstor.org/stable/24577604" www.jstor.org/stable/24577604Google Scholar
BioNews comment articles written by Wendy Kramer. (n.d.). BioNews. Retrieved June 29, 2021, from www.bionews.org.uk/page_5695” www.bionews.org.uk/page_5695Google Scholar
Bobbie Jo R. v. Traci W., No. 11–1753, 2013 WL 2462173 (W. Va. June 7, 2013)Google Scholar
Borry, P., Rusu, O., & Howard, H. (2013). Genetic testing: Anonymity of sperm donors under threat. Nature, 469, 169. https://doi.org/10.1038/496169eGoogle Scholar
Cahn, N. R. (2009). Necessary subjects: The need for a mandatory national donor gamete databank. DePaul Journal of Health Care Law, 12, 203–228.Google Scholar
Cahn, N. R. (2012). The new kinship. Georgetown Law Journal, 100(2), 367–429. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2018969Google Scholar
Cahn, N. R. (2014a). Do tell! The rights of donor-conceived offspring. Hofstra Law Review, 42(4), 1077–1124. https://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/hlr/vol42/iss4/3Google Scholar
Cahn, N. R. (2014b). The uncertain legal basis for the new kinship. Journal of Family Issues, 36(4), 501–518. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X14563797CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cahn, N. R. (2017). What’s right about knowing? Journal of Law & Biosciences, 4, 377–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3011639Google Scholar
Cahn, N. R. (2018). The new “art” of family: Connecting assisted reproductive technologies & identity rights. University of Illinois Law Review, 2018, 1443–1471.Google Scholar
Cahn, N. R. (2020). Crispr parents and informed consent. Southern Methodist University Science and Technology Law Review, 23(1), 3–30. https://scholar.smu.edu/scitech/vol23/iss1/2Google Scholar
Cahn, N. & Suter, S. (2022a). The art of regulating ART. Chicago-Kent Law Review (96), 29–86.Google Scholar
Cahn, N. & Suter, S. (2022b). Generations later, the rights of donor-conceived people are becoming law. The Hill, https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/3460149-generations-later-the-rights-of-donor-conceived-people-are-becoming-law/?rl=1Google Scholar
California Cryobank. (n.d.). Donor types. www.cryobank.com/how-it-works/donor-types/Google Scholar
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021, April 20). ART Success Rates. www.cdc.gov/art/artdata/index.htmlGoogle Scholar
Cohen, I. G., Coan, T., Ottey, M., & Boyd, C. (2016). Sperm donor anonymity and compensation: An experiment with American sperm donors. Journal of Law & the Biosciences, 3(3), 468–488. https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsw052Google Scholar
Copeland, L. (2017, July 27). Who was she? A DNA test only opened new mysteries. Washington Post. www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/lifestyle/she-thought-she-was-irish-until-a-dna-test-opened-a-100-year-old-mystery/Google Scholar
Crawshaw, M. (2017). Direct-to-consumer DNA testing: The fallout for individuals and their families unexpectedly learning of their donor conception origins. Human Fertility, 21(4), 225–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2017.1339127CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cryos. (n.d.). ID release or non-ID release sperm donor? www.cryosinternational.com/en-us/us-shop/become-a-donor/become-a-sperm-donor/how-to-become-a-sperm-donor/id-release-or-non-id-release-sperm-donor/Google Scholar
Davies, S. (2020). Queering America’s heteronormative family law through “well-conceived” legislation (or, genetic parents exist and sometimes your kid might want to know them). American Journal of Law & Medicine, 46(1), 89–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098858820919554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Declaration in Support of a Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (2019) Teuscher v. CCB-NWB, Att. A. para.VIII, E. Wash., No. 19-CV-00204.Google Scholar
Doe v. XYZ Co., 914 N.E.2d 117 (Mass. App. Ct. 2009)Google Scholar
Doe 1 v. Xytex Corp., No. 1:16-CV-1453-TWT, 2017 WL 1036484 (N.D. Ga. Mar. 17, 2017).Google Scholar
Donor Sibling Registry. (n.d.). https://donorsiblingregistry.com/Google Scholar
Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, 542 US 1 (2004)Google Scholar
Elston, S. W. (2020). Swipe right for daddy: Modern marketing of sperm and the need for honesty and transparency in advertising. Journal of Health & Life Sciences Law, 13, 28–56.Google Scholar
Entrikin, J. L. (2020). Family secrets and relational privacy: Protecting not-so-personal, sensitive information from public disclosure. University of Miami Law Review, 74(3), 781–897. https://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr/vol74/iss3/5Google Scholar
Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. (2009). Interests, obligations, and rights of the donor in gamete donation. Fertility and Sterility, 91(1), 22–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.09.062Google Scholar
Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. (2013). Informing offspring of their conception by gamete or embryo donation: A committee opinion. Fertility and Sterility, 100(1), 45–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.02.028Google Scholar
Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. (2014). Interests, obligations, and rights in gamete donation: a committee opinion. Fertility and Sterility, 102(3), 675–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.06.001Google Scholar
Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. (2018). Informing offspring of their conception by gamete or embryo donation: An Ethics Committee opinion. Fertility and Sterility, 109(4), 601–605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.01.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. (2019). Interests, obligations, and rights in gamete and embryo donation: An Ethics Committee opinion. Fertility and Sterility, 111(4), 664–670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.01.018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Food and Drug Administration. (2019, May 3). Testing donors of human cells, tissues, and cellular and tissue-based products (HCT/P): Specific requirements. www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/safety-availability-biologics/testing-donors-human-cells-tissues-and-cellular-and-tissue-based-products-hctp-specific-requirementsGoogle Scholar
Gan-Or, N. Y. (2020). Reproductive dreams and nightmares: Sperm donation in the age of at-home genetic testing. Loyola University Chicago Law Journal, 51(3), 791–833. https://lawecommons.luc.edu/luclj/vol51/iss3/5Google Scholar
Glazer, E. (2019, July 23). DNA testing forever changed donor conception. Harvard Health publishing. www.health.harvard.edu/blog/dna-testing-forever-changed-donor-conception-2019072317394Google Scholar
Harper, J. C., Kennett, D., & Reisel, D. (2016). The end of donor anonymity: How genetic testing is likely to drive anonymous gamete donation out of business. Human Reproduction, 31(6), 1135–1140. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dew065CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hasday, J. E. (2012). Siblings in law. Vanderbilt Law Review, 65(3), 897–931. https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr/vol65/iss3/4Google Scholar
Ishii, T., & de Miguel Beriain, I. (2022). Shifting to a model of donor conception that entails a communication agreement among the parents, donor, and offspring. BMC Medical Ethics, 23(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-022-00756-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson v. Superior Court, 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 864 (Cal. App. 2d Dist. 2000).Google Scholar
Johnston, L. (2016, July 3). Sperm donors fear “hi dad” showdown as DNA testing becomes more accessible. Express. www.express.co.uk/life-style/health/685599/Sperm-donors-DNA-testing-biological-father-offspring-anonymityGoogle Scholar
Jones, B. (1993). Do siblings possess constitutional rights? Cornell Law Review, 78(6), 1187–1220. http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr/vol78/iss6/4Google Scholar
Joslin, C. G. (2018). Preface to the UPA (2017). Family Law Quarterly, 52, 437–69.Google Scholar
Kramer, W., & Cahn, N. R. (2013). Finding Our Families: A First-of-Its-Kind Book for Donor-Conceived People and Their Families. Avery Publishing Group.Google Scholar
Mandelbaum, R. (2011). Delicate balances: Assessing the needs and rights of siblings in foster care to maintain their relationships post-adoption. New Mexico Law Review, 41(1), 1–67. https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/nmlr/vol41/iss1/3Google Scholar
Mendoza, B., & Diallo, A. (2020, October 26). The best DNA testing kit. Wirecutter. www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/reviews/best-dna-test/Google Scholar
Mroz, J. (2019, February 16). A mother learns the identity of her child’s grandmother. A sperm bank threatens to sue. NY Times. www.nytimes.com/2019/02/16/health/sperm-donation-dna-testing.htmlGoogle Scholar
Nejaime, D. (2017). The family’s constitution. Constitutional Commentary, 32, 413–448. https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/concomm/280Google Scholar
Perry-Rogers v. Fasano, 715 N.Y.S.2d 19 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dept. 2000)Google Scholar
Post, D. J., McCarthy, S., Sherman, R., & Bayimli, S. (2015). Are you still my family? Post-adoption sibling visitation. Capital University Law Review, 43(2), 307–372.Google Scholar
Reproductive Medicine Associates of Connecticut. (n.d.). Anonymous Egg Donation. www.rmact.com/anonymous-egg-donationGoogle Scholar
Resolve. (n.d.). Infertility coverage by state. https://resolve.org/what-are-my-options/insurance-coverage/infertility-coverage-state/Google Scholar
Rhode Island Title 15, Chapter 8.1, Sections 901 et seq. (2021)Google Scholar
Russell v. Pasik, 178 So. 3d 55 (Fla. 2d Dist. App. 2015)Google Scholar
Samuels, E. J. (2018). An immodest proposal for birth registration in donor-assisted reproduction, in the interest of science and human rights. New Mexico Law Review, 48(3), 416–451. https://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/fac_articles/5Google Scholar
S.B. 6037, 2017–2018 Regular Session (Wash. 2017).Google Scholar
Scharf, R. L. (2015). Separated at adoption: Addressing the challenges of maintaining sibling-of-origin bonds in post-adoption families. UC Davis Journal of Juvenile Law & Policy, 19(1), 84–125. https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/facpub/928Google Scholar
Seattle Sperm Bank. (n.d.). SSB connects. www.seattlespermbank.com/services/ssb-connects/Google Scholar
Sperm Bank of California, The. (n.d.). Identity release program. www.thespermbankofca.org/content/identity-release-programGoogle Scholar
Trachman, E. (2019, February 6). Beware of the home DNA kit! You may find yourself being sued by a sperm bank. Above the Law. https://abovethelaw.com/2019/02/beware-of-the-home-dna-kit-you-may-find-yourself-being-sued-by-a-sperm-bank/Google Scholar
Trachman, E. (2022a). Colorado is poised to pass a groundbreaking Donor-Conceived Person Protection Act. Above the Law. https://abovethelaw.com/2022/05/colorado-is-poised-to-pass-a-groundbreaking-donor-conceived-person-protection-actGoogle Scholar
Trachman, E. (2022b). New York proposes Donor-Conceived Person Protection Act. Above the Law. https://abovethelaw.com/2022/01/new-york-proposes-donor-conceived-person-protection-act/Google Scholar
Troxel v. Granville, 530 US 57 (2000)Google Scholar
Uniform Law Commission. (n.d.). Parentage Act. www.uniformlaws.org/committees/community-home?CommunityKey=c4f37d2d-4d20-4be0-8256-22dd73af068fGoogle Scholar
Uniform Parentage Act § 9 (2017a)Google Scholar
Uniform Parentage Act § 102(3) (2017b)Google Scholar
Uniform Parentage Act § 502(b)(2) (2017c)Google Scholar
Uniform Parentage Act § 904 cmt (2017d)Google Scholar
Uniform Parentage Act § 905(b) (2017e)Google Scholar
US Donor Conceived Council. (2022). 2022 Survey of U.S. sperm banks. www.usdcc.org/2022/04/19/2022-survey-of-us-sperm-banks/Google Scholar
VARTA. (2021). 2021 Annual Report. www.varta.org.au/sites/default/files/2021-12/varta-annual-report-2021.pdfGoogle Scholar
Wash. Rev. Code § 26.26.750 (2017)Google Scholar
Wash. Rev. Code § 26.26A.815 (2019)Google Scholar
Wilson, R. F. (2003). Uncovering the rationale for requiring infertility in surrogacy arrangements. American Journal of Law & Medicine, 29(2–3), 337–362.Google Scholar
Zadeh, S., Ilioi, E.g., Jadva, V., & Golombok, S. (2018). The perspectives of adolescents conceived using surrogacy, egg or sperm donation, Human Reproduction, 33(6), 1099–1106, https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dey088Google Scholar

References

Achilles, R. (1993). Protection from what? The secret life of donor insemination. Politics and the Life Sciences, 12(2), 171–172. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0730938400023996Google Scholar
Allan, S. (2017), Donor Conception and the Search for Information from Secrecy and Anonymity to Openness. Routledge.Google Scholar
Ando, K. (1949). Funinshō ni taisuru Shindan oyobi Chiryō no Shinpo (Advances in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Infertility). Nihon Rinshō 7(4), 217–221.Google Scholar
Ando, K. (1960). Jinkō jusei no jissi jotai (The present performance of artificial insemination), in Koike, R., Tanaka, M., & Hitomi, Y. (Eds.), Jinkō jusei no shomondai: Sono Jittai to Hōteki Sokumen (pp. 9–24). Tokyo: Hōgaku Kenkyu-kai, Keio University.Google Scholar
Anonymous, (2003, December 25). Teikōseishi de tanjyō no gō josei rainichi, omoi kataru (Australian donor-conceived woman speaks her thoughts in Japan), Gifu Shimbun.Google Scholar
Anonymous, (2004, September 11). Seishi teikyōsha wo shiru kenri wo (We want the right to know sperm donors), Mainichi Shimbun.Google Scholar
Anonymous, (2014, April 27). Life Score 3: Jinsei no gakufu 3: Ranshi teikyō, susumanu hōseibi, “Ranshi” motomete kaigai he wataru joseitachi (Life Score 3: Egg donation, lack of progress in legislation, women going overseas to seek “eggs”), Nikkei West, www.sankei.com/west/news/140427/wst1404270075-n1.html (last accessed May 31, 2022).Google Scholar
Anonymous, (2020, December 7). Giron kaishi kara rippōka made 20nen. Seishoku hojoiryōhō seiritsu ha naze okuretaka (Why was the enactment of the Assisted Reproductive Technology Law delayed? Twenty years from the start of discussion to legislation), Mainichi Shimbun, https://mainichi.jp/articles/20201207/k00/00m/040/256000c (last accessed June 1, 2022).Google Scholar
Asahi Home & Welfare Weekly (Katei Asahi) (1949, September 10). Jinkōjusei mondai no hihan (Criticism of artificial insemination), 10.1–2.Google Scholar
Castro-Vàzquez, G. (2017). Intimacy and Reproductive in Contemporary Japan. Routledge.Google Scholar
Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. (2013). Informing offspring of their conception by gamete or embryo donation: a committee opinion. Fertility and Sterility, 100(1), 45–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.02.028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fahey, R. (2022, January 13). A Tokyo-based mum is suing the sperm donor she had sex with to conceive her second child for fraud, Mirror Online, www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/woman-puts-baby-up-adoption-25938939 (last accessed June 1, 2022).Google Scholar
Hibino, Y. & Allan, S. (2020). Absence of laws regarding sperm and oocyte donation in Japan and the impacts on donors, parents, and the people born as a result. Reproductive Medicine and Biology, 19(3), 295–298. https://doi.org/10.1002/rmb2.12329Google Scholar
Higashi, K. (2017). Nihon ni okeru rezubian mazā (Lesbian mother in Japan). IGS Project Series No. 17 2016 nendo Seishoku iryō de keiseisareru tayōna kazoku to tōjisha no uerubi-ing wo kangaeru kenkyūkai houkokusho, Institute for Gender Studies, Ochanomizu University: 28–41. www2.igs.ocha.ac.jp/ips/ips-17/ (last accessed November 10, 2021).Google Scholar
Indekeu, A., Dierickx, K., Schotsmans, P., Daniels, K. R., Rober, P., & D’Hooghe, T. (2013). (2013) Factors contributing to parental decision-making in disclosing donor conception: a systematic review, Human Reproduction, 19(6), 714–733. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmt018Google Scholar
Kuji, N. et al. (2000). Teikyo seishi ni yori kodomowo eta nihonjin fufu no kokuchi ni taisuru iken ni kansuru kenkyū (Survey of attitudes of male infertile patients who have a child via DI). Japanese Journal of Fertility and Sterility 45(3): 219–225.Google Scholar
Kuji, N. et al. (2005). Wagakuni ni okeru seishi teikyōsha no ‘shutsuji wo shiru kenri’ ni taisuru ishiki chosa (Survey of sperm donors’ attitudes toward ‘the right to know of donor offspring’ in Japan). Health and Labor Sciences Research Grant: http://admin7.aiiku.or.jp/~doc/houkoku/h16/62795070.pdfGoogle Scholar
Kokado, M. (2015). A new phase in the regulation of assisted reproductive technology in Japan. Zeitschrift für Japanisches Recht, 20(40), 211–232.Google Scholar
Kusaka, K., Shimizu, K., & Nagaoki, S. (2006). Hi haigūshakan jinkōjusei de umareta hito no shinri (The identification of children born through AID). Language, Culture and Communication 37, 93–101.Google Scholar
Mainichi Shimbun Online (2020, December 5). Seishoku iryōho seiritsu: Mazu ippo ‘Kūhaku no 20 nen’ kurikaesanai tameni (Reproductive Medicine Act passed: First step to avoid repeating blank 20 years), https://mainichi.jp/articles/20201205/k00/00m/040/062000c (last accessed June 1, 2022).Google Scholar
Matsuo, Y. (2014, November 6). Dairi shussan, jinkō jusei, IVF… Seishokuiryō no giron kara nigeruna (Do not run away from the debate on reproductive medicine), Tokyo Express, http://tokyoexpress.info/2014/11/06/%e4%bb%a3%e7%90%86%e5%87%ba%e7%94%a3%e3%80%81%e4%ba%ba%e5%b7%a5%e6%8e%88%e7%b2%be%e3%80%81%e4%bd%93%e5%a4%96%e5%8f%97%e7%b2%be%e3%80%82%e7%94%9f%e6%ae%96%e5%8c%bb%e7%99%82%e3%81%ae%e8%ad%b0/ (last accessed November 10, 2021).Google Scholar
Miyazima, A. (2017). Seishokuiryō to datsu “shutuji” shakai (Assisted Reproductive Technology and an Escape from the Society of Respecting “Biological” Origin). Tokyo: Health System Kenkyusho.Google Scholar
Motomura, Y. (2003, November 24). “Chichi” sagasu jinkō juseiji no ko (DI Offspring is looking for “biological father”), Mainichi Shimbun.Google Scholar
Nagamizu, Y. (2021). Arubeki seishoku hojoiryō hōsei wo megutte kentō subeki kadai (In search of an appropriate policy on regulating assisted reproductive technologies and ascertaining the parentage of children born as a result of ART). Momoyama Gakuho, 35(21). www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/momoyamahougaku/35/0/35_1/_pdf (last accessed November 10, 2021).Google Scholar
Nezu, Y., & Sawami, R. (2009) Haha to musume no dairi shussan (Surrogacy between mother and daughter), Haru shobō.Google Scholar
Ninomiya, S. (2010). Kodomo no shiru kenri nitsuite (Donor children’s right to know). Gakujutsu no Dōkō, 15(5), 40–45.Google Scholar
Nomura, M. (2018, October 30). Daisansha teikyo no jinkō jusei chūshi: Keio byōin kokunaino hansū jisshi (Keio University Hospital which had been performing half of DI in Japan discontinue DI), Yomiuri Shimbun, Morning edition, p. 32.Google Scholar
Ono, T., Kaneko, S., & Tanabe, K. (2004) Shutsuji wo shiru kenri – Hitoku to Kaiji (Right to know – Confidentiality and disclosure). Sanfujinka no Sekai, 56(2), 113–119.Google Scholar
Osaki, T. (2020, December 27). “DM if interested”: Sperm donors in Japan operate in a gray zone, The Japan Times, www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/12/27/national/science-health/japan-sperm-donors/ (last accessed November 10, 2021).Google Scholar
Saimura, M. (2008). Kodomo no jinken shingai to sōsharu wāku (Human rights violation against donor children and social work). In Saimura, M. ed., Seishoku hojoiryō de umareta kodomo no shutsuji wo shiru kenri (Right to Know of Donor Children), 264–281 Tokyo: Fukumura Publisher.Google Scholar
Sakai, R., & Kasuga, M. (2004). Tsukurareu inochi (Creation of Life) Tokyo: NHK Book.Google Scholar
Semba, Y. et al. (2006). AID ni okeru “shutsuji wo shiru kenri: AID de umareta hitotachi ga motomeru teikyō jyōhō toha (The “right to know” in AID: Donor information sought by AID offspring). Seimei Rinri: Journal of Japan Association for Bioethics, 17(1), 147–153.Google Scholar
Semba, Y., Chang, C., Hong, H., Kamisato, A., Kokado, M., & Muto, K. (2010). Surrogacy: donor conception regulation in Japan. Bioethics, 24(7), 348–357. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8519.2009.01780.xGoogle Scholar
Shimizu, K., Kusaka, K. & Nagaoki, S. (2007) The experiences of women who decided to use DI (Japanese: Hi haigushakan) Journal of Japanese Society of Fertility Nursing, 4(1), 16–25.Google Scholar
Shimizu, K. (2020). Kokuchi ni taisuru oya no omoi – Oya no kai no jissen kara (Parents’ thoughts on telling truth – From the activities of parents’ groups). In Watashitachi ga taisetsu ni shitai mono: AID de kazoku ni natta hitotachi no kokuchi heno omoi to jissen kara (Parents’ thoughts on telling: through the activities of self-support group of parents. Story of Our Family). Tokyo: JSPS, 145–153.Google Scholar
Wakabayshi, M., & Horioka, C. Y. (2006). Is the eldest son different? The residential choice of siblings in Japan. NBER Working Paper Series. www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w12655/w12655.pdf (last accessed November 10, 2021).Google Scholar
Yamagata, N., Hoshi, K., Hirata, S., et al. (2003). Seishoku hojoiryō nitsuiteno ishiki chōsa 2003 Shūkei kekka (The survey of public attitudes towards donor conception 2003). www.mhlw.go.jp/wp/kenkyu/db/tokubetu02/index.html (last accessed November 10, 2021).Google Scholar
Yamamoto, N., Hirata, T., Izumi, G., Nakazawa, A., Fukuda, S., Neriishi, K., Arakawa, T., Masashi Takamura, M., Harada, M., Hirota, Y. Koga, K., Wada-Hiraike, O., Fujii, T., Irahara, M. & Osuga, Y. (2018). A survey of public attitudes towards third-party reproduction in Japan in 2014. PLOS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0198499Google Scholar
Yanaihara, T., & Yamagata, N. (1999). Survey on patient awareness of assisted reproductive technology: National survey (in Japanese, Seishoku hojoiryō ni taisuru kanja no ishiki ni kansuru kenkyū). Report on 1999 Children and Home Comprehensive Research Project (Grant-in-Aid from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS)) www.niph.go.jp/wadai/mhlw/1999/h1118028.pdf (last accessed November 10, 2021).Google Scholar
Yokota, A, & Watanabe, R. (2020, December 7). Giron kaishi kara rippōka made 20 nen: Seishoku Iryōhō ha naze okuretaka) (20 years from the start of discussions to legislation: Why did it take so long for Assisted Medicine Act to be passed?), Mainichi Shimbun Online, https://mainichi.jp/articles/20201207/k00/00m/040/256000c (last accessed June 1, 2022).Google Scholar
Yomiuri Shimbun Online (2021, April 16). SNS de seishi torihiki ga kyūzō: Funin fūfura riyō, kisei naku muhō jōtai (Sperm donation on SNS are increasing rapidly. Used by infertile couples, no legal regulations); www.yomiuri.co.jp/national/20210416-OYT1T50093/ (last accessed November 10, 2021).Google Scholar
Yui, H. (2011). Hi-haigushakan jinkō jusei niyotte shushō shitaka hito no raifu sutorī (A life story of a person conceived through artificial insemination by donor). Ritsumekan Ningen Kagaku Kenkyū, 24, 35–48.Google Scholar
Yui, H. (2012). Nihon hatsu no jinkō jusei seikōrei ni kansuru rekishiteki kentō: Ishi no gensetsu wo chūshin ni (A history study about first experience of successful artificial insemination in Japan: An analysis of doctors’ statements), Core Ethics, 8, 423–432.Google Scholar
Yui, H. (2015). Jinkō jusei no kindai (Modern History of Artificial Insemination), Tokyo: Seikyusha.Google Scholar
Yui, H. (2021). A history of Japanese follow-up surveys of children conceived through artificial insemination by donor: The evidence of “superior” children and positive eugenics. EASTS, 16, 50-69. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4498171/pdf/FVVinObGyn-7-137-143.pdfGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×