Article info
PDFLaw, ethics and medicine
Paper
Perimortem gamete retrieval: should we worry about consent?
- Correspondence to Dr Anna Smajdor, Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK; a.smajdor{at}uea.ac.uk
Citation
Perimortem gamete retrieval: should we worry about consent?
Publication history
- Received July 16, 2013
- Revised April 15, 2014
- Accepted June 10, 2014
- First published July 3, 2014.
Online issue publication
April 27, 2016
Article Versions
- Previous version (27 April 2016).
- You are viewing the most recent version of this article.
Request permissions
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information
Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions
Other content recommended for you
- Response to Orr and Siegler—collective intentionality and procreative desires: the permissible view on consent to posthumous conception
- Assisted conception and the law in the United Kingdom
- Gametes or organs? How should we legally classify ovaries used for transplantation in the USA?
- Age—not sex or gender—makes the case of Ellie Anderson Complex
- The ethical case for non-directed postmortem sperm donation
- Government reviews law on “posthumous conceptions”
- Consent agreements for cryopreserved embryos: the case for choice
- Preservation of fertility in children treated for cancer
- Fertility law and regulation need to change—here’s how it could happen
- ‘I haven’t met them, I don’t have any trust in them. It just feels like a big unknown’: a qualitative study exploring the determinants of consent to use Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority registry data in research