Article Text
Abstract
In this paper, I examine two key arguments advanced by the Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority (HFEA) and the Nuffield Council justifying anonymous mitochondrial donation, even though the ‘right to know’ is recognised in standard gamete donation. I argue that the two arguments they offer, what I call the argument from genetic connection and the argument from personal characteristics, are unsuccessful. However, I provide additional reasons for why recognising the right to know in gamete donation but not in mitochondrial donation may be justified. I further argue that the status quo in the UK, which is to not recognise a right to know in mitochondrial donation, is provisionally acceptable.
- Reproductive Medicine
- Philosophical Ethics
- Rights
This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt and build upon this work, for commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Other content recommended for you
- Lesbian motherhood and mitochondrial replacement techniques: reproductive freedom and genetic kinship
- Does egg donation for mitochondrial replacement techniques generate parental responsibilities?
- Ethics briefings
- Mitochondrial replacement techniques for treating infertility
- Recognition, investigation and management of mitochondrial disease
- Government gives the go ahead for mitochondrial donation during IVF
- Gamete derivation from stem cells: revisiting the concept of genetic parenthood
- The need for donor consent in mitochondrial replacement
- Mitochondrial donation could benefit 150 UK women a year, study says
- Using stem cell-derived gametes for same-sex reproduction: an alternative scenario