title: Conceptualising a child-centric paradigm : do we have freedom of choice in donor conception reproduction?
abstract: Since its inception, donor conception practices have been a reproductive choice for the infertile. Past and current practices have the potential to cause significant and lifelong harm to the offspring through loss of kinship, heritage, identity, and family health history, and possibly through introducing physical problems. Legislation and regulation in Australia that specifies that the welfare of the child born as a consequence of donor conception is paramount may therefore be in conflict with the outcomes. Altering the paradigm to a child-centric model, however, impinges on reproductive choice and rights of adults involved in the process. With some lobby groups pushing for increased reproductive choice while others emphasise offspring rights there is a dichotomy of interests that society and legislators need to address. Concepts pertaining to a shift toward a child-centric paradigm are discussed.
authors.affiliation: School of Nursing and Midwifery, Flinders University, Sturt Road, Bedford Park, South Australia, Australia, 5042, damianhadams@yahoo.com.au.
authors.forename: Damian H
authors.initials: DH
authors.lastname: Adams
mesh_terms: D001315:Australia; D002648:Child; D002651:Child Advocacy / Q000941:ethics* / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007246:Infertility / Q000628:therapy*; D008297:Male; D028701:Patient Rights / Q000941:ethics* / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D026684:Personal Autonomy; D012098:Reproduction / Q000941:ethics*; D046269:Reproductive Rights / Q000941:ethics* / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D027724:Reproductive Techniques, Assisted / Q000941:ethics* / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D014019:Tissue Donors / Q000941:ethics* / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence