The Scope of Donor-Conceived Person’s Right to Access Information about the Gamete Donor in Europe – A Comparative Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Legal regulations concerning infertility treatment differ among European jurisdictions. Broadly speaking, three types of gamete donation are distinguished – anonymous donation, identifiable donation, and known donation. However, using only these terms during a debate on international standard of gamete donation is a significant simplification. Even in those jurisdictions in which the same model of gamete donation occurs, the scope of information about a donor that is accessible for a child differs. Moreover, in some jurisdictions, the law permits donors and recipients to choose between two or more types of gamete donation. This paper therefore analyses the extent to which the donor’s data is accessible to a donor-conceived person within these different regimes. It argues that a balanced international standard for data exchange concerning gamete donation could be acceptable for all European countries. This paper concludes that it would be a positive first step to harmonise legal framework of gamete donation in Europe to reach a position that would be acceptable for countries in which donor’s anonymity is protected, as well as in countries in which the donor’s identity is always open for a donor conceived-person.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".