L'anonymat des dons de gamètes et d'embryons au Québec et au Canada: Essai théorique sur l'internormativité entre le droit positif et l'éthique de la sollicitude dans la résolution du conflit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While there may be a consensus regarding the provision of medical and genetic information to the offspring of gametes donation, the disclosure of nominative information continues to be a source of controversy—as much for a child who is looking to find out his origins, the donor who wants to maintain his anonymity and privacy, or for parents seeking information about how their child was conceived. This issue has been making the news lately as an increasing number of countries have, over the past 20 years, decided to end donor anonymity. The laws of Quebec and Canada continue to maintain the principle of donor anonymity.The choice of whether to favour donor anonymity or the child's attempts to learn about his origins and has significant consequences for everyone involved in gametes and embryos donation. The clash of values and debates that have led to uncertainty about making the "right legislative choice" and our ability to consider any of these positions to be the best requires thinking about the basis of the decision-making process. This means looking beyond legislation and taking ethics into consideration. In a context of normative pluralism, how does one strike a balance between the rights and interests of the offspring of assisted reproduction, the gamete donors and the couple that made use of assisted reproduction to conceive a child, while maximizing the benefits of assisted reproduction and minimizing negative consequences?Based on the analysis made by the Royal Commission on New Reproductive Technologies (Canada, 1993), we are proposing a study on internormative phenomena between the substantive rule that must be adopted by the state (whose regulatory legitimacy is affirmed) and the ethics of solicitude. This internormativity is the theoretical instrument that allows exchanges and inter influence among various types of norms.Based on empathy and responsibility, the ethics of care is of interest as it defines the person not only in terms of rights, but in terms of his relationships with others. This is a key element of the issues being examined where stakeholders maintain interrelations in a variety of areas—legal, affective, sociological or biological. Apart from the moral considerations, this leads us to consider each party's responsibility from a different angle while seeking to demonstrate the latter's impact on substantive rule. The ethics of care being based on the interdependancy of relationships between individuals, with the child at the centre, we notice it comes up at two levels: first in the parent–child relationship regarding secrecy of the method of conception then, in a donor–child relationship with respect to obtaining personal information.Lastly, based on the assumption that the ethics of care can be a relevant instrument for guiding lawmakers, we will compare Canadian and Quebec legislation with that of France and the United Kingdom. Investigating potential changes to the law requires an examination of legislation that has already done away with anonymity or contemplates doing so. France and the United Kingdom have long led the way in providing a legal framework for assisted reproduction. One of the objectives of the comparative law study is to analyze how ethics and law interact in the conflict and manifest themselves in various legislative approaches. This will ultimately enable us to better understand, comment and critique the positions adopted by Canada and Quebec.
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 | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.027 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".