Article Text
Abstract
Assisted reproduction using donor gametes is a procedure that allows those who are unable to produce their own gametes to achieve gestational parenthood. Where conception is achieved using donor sperm, the child lacks a genetic link to the intended father. Where it is achieved using a donor egg, the child lacks a genetic link to the intended mother. To address this lack of genetic kinship, some fertility clinics engage in the practice of matching the ethnicity of the gamete donor to that of the recipient parent. The intended result is for the child to have the phenotypic characteristics of the recipient parents. This paper examines the philosophical and ethical problems raised by the policy of ethnic matching in gamete donation. I consider arguments for the provision of ethnic matching based on maximising physical resemblance and fostering ethnic identity development. I then consider an argument against ethnic matching based on the charge of racialism. I conclude that while the practice of ethnic matching in gamete donation could promote positive ethnic identity development in donor-conceived children from historically subjugated ethnic minorities, it also risks endorsing the problematic societal attitudes and assumptions regarding ethnicity that enabled such subjugation in the first place.
- family
- minorities
- political philosophy
- applied and professional ethics
- artificial insemination and surrogacy
This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Contributors HM is the sole author of the paper and responsible for the conception and design of the work, drafting and revising the work, the final approval of the version submitted and for ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
Funding This study was supported by Wellcome Trust (grant number: 097897/Z/11/Z).
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent Not required.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Other content recommended for you
- Mitochondrial donation and ‘the right to know’
- Contacting gamete donors to facilitate diagnostic genetic testing for the donor-conceived child: what are the rights and obligations of gamete donors in these cases? A response to Horton et al
- Lesbian motherhood and mitochondrial replacement techniques: reproductive freedom and genetic kinship
- Old consent and new developments: health professionals should ask and not presume
- ‘These were made-to-order babies’: Reterritorialised Kinship, Neoliberal Eugenics and Artificial Reproductive Technology in Kishwar Desai’s Origins of Love
- Lowering the age limit of access to the identity of the gamete donor by donor offspring: the argument against
- Intractable infertility
- The ethical case for non-directed postmortem sperm donation
- Is it acceptable to contact an anonymous egg donor to facilitate diagnostic genetic testing for the donor-conceived child?
- Ethics briefing