Legal regulation of gamete and embryo donation: global and national trends (literature review)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While the assisted reproductive technologies have been available for several decades, there still exists a great divergence in legal frameworks regulating reproductive donation. The article discusses legal regulations on embryo and gamete (sperm and oocytes) donation in Europe, Americas, Canada and Australia. The search for publications was carried out in all available bibliographic and abstract databases (RSCI, Scopus, Web of Science, CyberLeninka, eLibrary, PubMed) containing reports on the subject of the article. The main search restrictions were the language of publications (English and Russian) and the date of reports (not earlier than 2000). We seek to chart global trends and identify major legislative “gaps”; the latter emerge because each type of reproductive donation causes specific conflicts and calls for specific regulations. There is a visible trend towards open gamete donation across the globe as more and more governments insist on deanonymization of donors. Legislators intend to protect children’s interests and to secure their right to identify their biological parents. Financial remuneration is perceived differently, and regulations diverge across the globe. Many governments permit reimbursements, but do not allow any commercial payoffs. Yet, issues of parenthood and donor-recipient obligations remain quite controversial, which results in divergent legal frameworks. Sperm donation is the least controversial and safest procedure; therefore, it is legal in all countries and is allowed in non-medical setting. On the other hand, informal sperm donation requires targeted legal regulations. Parenthood and anonymity in sperm donation also cause concern and require specific legislation. In some countries, oocyte donation is illegal while in others it is under severe limitations. Currently medical treatment and observation of oocyte donors after ART cycles is not yet legally regulated, which leaves women unprotected from post-donation health issues. Embryo donation hinges on the status of the embryo. Specific definition will determine the consequences including from adoption to research use. There remains a problem of authority over embryo’s future in cases of a spouse’s death or divorce.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.019 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".