Article info
PDFResponse
Old consent and new developments: health professionals should ask and not presume
- Correspondence to Professor Anneke M Lucassen, Clinical Ethics and Law group (CELS), Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK; a.m.lucassen{at}soton.ac.uk
Citation
Old consent and new developments: health professionals should ask and not presume
Publication history
- Received September 25, 2019
- Accepted October 14, 2019
- First published October 29, 2019.
Online issue publication
November 15, 2022
Article Versions
- Previous version (15 November 2022).
- 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
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Other content recommended for you
- 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
- Is it acceptable to contact an anonymous egg donor to facilitate diagnostic genetic testing for the donor-conceived child?
- Ethical problems with ethnic matching in gamete donation
- Social egg freezing and donation: waste not, want not
- Intractable infertility
- Mitochondrial donation and ‘the right to know’
- Lowering the age limit of access to the identity of the gamete donor by donor offspring: the argument against
- Good eggs? Evaluating consent forms for egg donation
- Having a child together in lesbian families: combining gestation and genetics
- Does egg donation for mitochondrial replacement techniques generate parental responsibilities?