Ethical issues in oocyte banking for nonautologous use: an Ethics Committee opinion.

Ethical considerations for the banking of oocytes for nonautologous use are discussed.

Financial compensation of oocyte donors: an Ethics Committee opinion.

Financial compensation of women donating oocytes for reproductive or research purposes is justified on ethical grounds and should acknowledge the time, inconvenience, and discomfort associated with screening, ovarian stimulation, oocyte retrieval, and postretrieval recovery and not vary according to the planned use of the oocytes or the number or quality of oocytes retrieved. This document replaces the document of the same name published in 2016.

[Ethical and legal questions of anonymity and confidentiality in gamete donation]. / Cuestiones éticas y legales del anonimato y la confidencialidad en la donación de gametos.

Spain is the European country where more assisted reproduction techniques (ART) are performed, reaching 9% of newborns. The objective of this article is to introduce the legal framework and to analyze some ethical questions, not without controversy, in relation to the anonymity of gamete donors and the concealment of origin by ART from their children. Spanish legislation establishes the relative anonymity of donors: both gamete recipients and born children have the right to obtain general information about them as long as their identity is not included, but in situations of risk to the life and health of the children allows your bankruptcy. Likewise, an unequivocal right to privacy and confidentiality of submission to the ART is established. The movement aimed at introducing in our country a legislative amendment that ends the anonymity of gamete donors is based on the right of those children to know their biological origin. Along with legal changes, the attitude of parents and professionals must gradually change towards more transparent and responsible communication, based on the experiences of adults conceived by these techniques, and those adopted. Building values such as trust and truth in the family relationships from responsibility requires placing the children, largely forgotten and the most vulnerable part, at the center of the debate.

Germline Genome Editing Research: What Are Gamete Donors (Not) Informed About in Consent Forms?

The potential for using germline genome editing (GGE) in humans has garnered a lot of attention, both for its scientific possibilities as well as for the ethical, legal, and social challenges it ignites. The ethical debate has focused primarily on the suggestions of using GGE to establish a pregnancy (i.e., to offer it in a clinical setting), which is, to date, illegal in many jurisdictions. The use of GGE in research (where a pregnancy would not be established) has received much less attention, despite the fact that it raises serious ethical and social issues as well. Herein, we report on the analysis of informed consent forms for egg and sperm donation used in a widely publicized study where genome editing was used to correct a disease-causing genetic mutation in human embryos. Importantly, embryos were created using eggs and sperm obtained specifically for these experiments. The analysis indicates deficiencies in how the forms addressed various issues, including limited and potentially misleading information about the sensitive nature of the study, the lack of an explicit mention of genomic sequencing, as well as the poor readability of the forms. Furthermore, the arguably high compensation of U.S.$5,000 for egg donors raises questions about undue inducement to participate in research. Moreover, since the procurement of eggs involves serious health risks, it may be questioned whether research requiring such a procedure should be pursued. If such experiments are continued, donors should be informed about all relevant aspects in order to make informed decisions about participating.

[Preliminary study on the experience of egg donors at the CHRU in Tours: Key features for future research]. / Étude préliminaire sur le vécu des donneuses d'ovocytes au CHRU de Tours : des éléments clés identifiés pour de futures recherches.

OBJECTIVES: This exploratory survey aims to identify the obstacles to egg donation (ED), based on the donors' experience. Despite 30 years of practice and awareness-raising campaigns, ED in France suffers from a shortage of female donors due to a lack of knowledge of this donation (Agence de la biomédecine, 2017). METHOD: Qualitative study by semi-directive interviews conducted between January and August 2018 at the CHRU in Tours with 15 egg donors in the postoperative period. RESULTS: The donation generated a sense of pride and personal accomplishment among the donors, in contrast to the lack of recognition of their actions by professionals and their entourage. Physical commitment does not seem to be a barrier to donation. The organisational and logistical constraints were identified as one of the main obstacles, while 70% of the interviewees stressed the benevolence of the practitioners. Finally, the donation opened up questions for them on female fertility, maternity and the role of gender norms in gamete donation. CONCLUSION: The survey reveals the technical dimension of ED imposed by the biomedical system deplored by donors, and highlights the need to recognize their actions. Physical engagement is not a major obstacle, unlike organizational and relational aspects. This study opens up an important field of investigation, which should be explored in particular in the perspective of a French bioethical reform of ED.

Decisional authority of gamete donors over embryos created with their gametes.

In the ongoing discussion on the rights and obligations of gamete donors, scant attention has been paid to the decisional authority of gamete donors over the disposition of the embryos created with their gametes. This paper analyses four different positions: three cases relate to the disposition options for surplus or unused embryos by the first recipients, and one case relates to the use of the embryos stored by the first recipients for procreation.We conclude that the gamete donor causally contributes to the creation of the embryos and thus becomes indirectly responsible. To avoid that donors would become accomplices to an activity to which they morally object, a qualified generic consent mentioning types of research should be obtained. No consent from the donor is required for the destruction of the embryos.The cancellation of the agreement by anonymous or identifiable gamete donors should not be possible for embryos in storage for reproduction by the recipients. The interests in not becoming a genetic parent against one's wishes do not outweigh the damage done to recipients who would no longer be able to use their embryos. Known donors, on the contrary, should be able to withdraw their consent up to the moment of transfer of the embryos based on the greater harm caused to them as a consequence of attributional parenthood. They should also be able to veto transfer of the embryos to other people than the original recipients.

Worlds apart or two sides of the same coin? Attitudes, meanings, and motives of potential oocyte and sperm donors in Austria.

PURPOSE: Gamete donors and recipients of such donations have been explored by previous studies, which mostly focus on post-donation scenarios. Our study analyses the general willingness to donate oocytes or sperm and focuses on differences between potential female and male donors in attitudes, meanings, and motives in a pre-donation setting. METHODS: An electronic survey (n = 555 students) was used in this anonymous observational study. To enable comparisons between men and women regarding their attitudes, meanings, and motives and their willingness to donate gametes, we designed two separate questionnaires. RESULTS: The sample was divided into three groups based on the willingness to donate: potential donors (n = 133; women: 48.1%, men: 51.9%); doubtful donors (n = 207; women: 75.8%, men: 24.2%); and non-donors (n = 215; women: 68.3%, men: 31.7%). The group of potential male donors (39.2%) was significantly larger than the group of potential female donors (16.9%). Significant differences regarding altruism, the meaning of one's self-worth, and passing on the own genes were found between doubtful and potential donors. Potential donors attached less value to altruism but more value to the enhancement of one's self-worth and passing on one's genes than doubtful donors. The motive of passing on one's genes and altruistic motives were more important to men than to women. CONCLUSION: This study helps to create a better understanding of potential donors in the existing donation framework and supports the evaluation of the given regimes in the context of designing an improved framework.

What constitutes a reasonable compensation for non-commercial oocyte donors: an analogy with living organ donation and medical research participation.

There is a growing consensus that the offer of a reasonable compensation for oocyte donation for reproductive treatment is acceptable if it does not compromise voluntary and altruistically motivated donation. However, how to translate this 'reasonable compensation' in practice remains unclear as compensation rates offered to oocyte donors between different European Union countries vary significantly. Clinics involved in oocyte donation, as well as those in other medical contexts, might be encouraged in calculating a more consistent and transparent compensation for donors if the elements that constitute a reasonable compensation are explicated. In doing so, lessons can be learnt from living organ donation and medical research participation. Practices in which the elements of a reasonable compensation for the individuals involved have already been more defined in the literature. By means of analogical reasoning, we will outline the different components of a reasonable compensation and subsequently apply these to the context of oocyte donation. We will argue that oocyte donors should first of all be reasonably reimbursed direct expenses related to the donation, without standard remuneration of lost wages. Second, donating oocytes requests a serious time investment, therefore donors are entitled to suitable compensation for their time spent and efforts made. Finally, we will explain that a reasonable compensation consisting of these two components allows for altruism to remain the key value of oocyte donation for reproductive treatment. However, if we acknowledge that donors' motives are more complex and often include reasons from self-interest, the reasonable compensation may be complemented with modest (non)monetary benefits.

Is it acceptable to contact an anonymous egg donor to facilitate diagnostic genetic testing for the donor-conceived child?

We discuss a case where medically optimal investigations of health problems in a donor-conceived child would require their egg donor to participate in genetic testing. We argue that it would be justified to contact the egg donor to ask whether she would consider this, despite her indicating on a historical consent form that she did not wish to take part in future research and that she did not wish to be informed if she was found to be a carrier of a 'harmful inherited condition'. We suggest that we cannot conjecture what her current answer might be if, by participating in clinical genetic testing, she might help reach a diagnosis for the donor-conceived child. At the point that she made choices regarding future contact, it was not yet evident that the interests of the donor-conceived child might be compromised by her answers, as it was not foreseen that the egg donor's genome might one day have the potential to enable diagnosis for this child. Fertility consent forms tend to be conceptualised as representing incontrovertible historical boundaries, but we argue that rapid evolution in genomic practice means that consent in such cases is better seen as an ongoing and dynamic process. It cannot be possible to compel the donor to aid in the diagnosis of the donor-conceived child, but she should be given the opportunity to do so.

[Thoughts on the revision of the bioethics law in the field of assisted reproductive technologies (ART). The end of a conceptual framework?] / Réflexions autour de la révision de la loi bioéthique dans le domaine de l'assistance médicale à la procréation - Une rupture du cadre conceptuel ?

This contribution aims at analysing and presenting a comparative dimension concerning the issues raised for the upcoming French Bioethics law revision in the field of assisted reproductive technologies (ART) : access of female same-sex couples and single women to ART ; the authorization of post-mortem procreation ; enlarging eligibility criteria for oocyte self-conservation ; and lifting the anonymity of gamete donation. These questions touch at the very heart of the French bioethics model conceived in 1994, and their revision would constitute a conceptual upheaval.

Stakeholders views on the ethical aspects of oocyte banking for third-party assisted reproduction: a qualitative interview study with donors, recipients and professionals.

STUDY QUESTION: What are the moral considerations held by donors, recipients and professionals towards the ethical aspects of the intake and distribution of donor bank oocytes for third-party assisted reproduction? SUMMARY ANSWER: Interviews with oocyte donors, oocyte recipients and professionals demonstrate a protective attitude towards the welfare of the donor and the future child. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The scarcity of donor oocytes challenges the approach towards the many ethical aspects that arise in establishing and operating an oocyte bank for third-party assisted reproduction. Including experiences and moral considerations originating from practice provides useful insight on how to overcome these challenges. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: The project was set-up as a qualitative interview study and took place between October 2016 and August 2017. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We conducted 25 semi-structured interviews with professionals engaged in the practice of oocyte banking (n = 10), recipients of donor oocytes (n = 7) and oocyte donors (n = 8). Key themes were formulated by means of a thematic analysis. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Based on the interviews, we formulated four main themes describing stakeholders' views regarding the ethical aspects of the intake and distribution of donor bank oocytes. First, respondents articulated that when selecting donors and recipients, healthcare workers should prevent donors from making a wrong decision and safeguard the future child's well-being by minimizing health risks and selecting recipients based on their parental capabilities. Second, they proposed to provide a reasonable compensation and to increase societal awareness on the scarcity of donor oocytes to diminish barriers for donors. Third, respondents considered the prioritization of recipients in case of scarcity a difficult choice, because they are all dependent on donor oocytes to fulfil their wish for a child. They emphasized that treatment attempts should be limited, but at least include one embryo transfer. Fourth and finally, the importance of good governance of oocyte banks was mentioned, including a homogenous policy and the facilitation of exchange of experiences between oocyte banks. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The possibility of selection bias exists, because we interviewed donors and recipients who were selected according to the criteria currently employed in the clinics. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Respondents' moral considerations regarding the ethical aspects of the intake and distribution of donor oocytes demonstrate a protective attitude towards the welfare of the donor and the future child. At the same time, respondents also questioned whether such a (highly) protective attitude was justified. This finding may indicate there is room for reconsidering strategies for the collection and distribution of donor bank oocytes. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study was funded by ZonMw: The Dutch Organization for Health Research and Development (Grant number 70-73000-98-200). A.M.E.B. and B.C.J.M.F. are the initiators of the UMC Utrecht oocyte bank. J.J.P.M.P. is the director of the MCK Fertility Centre. IMC is working as a gynaecologist at the AMC Amsterdam oocyte bank. During the most recent 5-year period, BCJM Fauser has received fees or grant support from the following organizations (in alphabetic order): Actavis/Watson/Uteron, Controversies in Obstetrics & Gynaecologist (COGI), Dutch Heart Foundation, Dutch Medical Research Counsel (ZonMW), Euroscreen/Ogeda, Ferring, London Womens Clinic (LWC), Merck Serono (GFI), Myovant, Netherland Genomic Initiative (NGI), OvaScience, Pantharei Bioscience, PregLem/Gedeon Richter/Finox, Reproductive Biomedicine Online (RBMO), Roche, Teva and World Health Organization (WHO). The authors have no further competing interests to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Genetic databases and the future of donor anonymity.

Anonymity is a multifaceted term. Anonymity is rarely eternal or absolute. The use of genetic databases increases the risk of identification of previously anonymous donors. Searches through genetic databases jeopardize the privacy of people who did and did not register on them. Three types of searches can be distinguished in the context of gamete donation: offspring looking for their donor, offspring looking for donor siblings and donors looking for their donor offspring. All three types of searches violate the rights of recipients and donors. It is argued that despite the existence of genetic databases, anonymity maintains the same function as it had before: it expresses a wish for distance and privacy by both donors and recipients and, even if not enforceable, should be respected by all parties in good faith.

Interests, obligations, and rights in gamete and embryo donation: an Ethics Committee opinion.

This Ethics Committee report outlines the interests, obligations, and rights of all parties involved in gamete and embryo donation: both males and females who choose to provide gametes or embryos for use by others, recipients of donated gametes and embryos, individuals born as a result of gamete or embryo donation, and the programs that provide donated gametes and embryos to patients. This document replaces the document "Interests, obligations, and rights of the donor in gamete donation," last published in 2014.

[Gamete donation: (un)answered social and ethical issues in Portugal]. / Doação de gametas: questões sociais e éticas (não) respondidas em Portugal.

Awareness of the discussion surrounding the social and ethical challenges regarding gamete donation is crucial for good governance of assisted reproduction techniques. In this article, we analyze the topics that guided the debate in the Portuguese ethics organizations, discussing their connections with themes addressed internationally. To that end, in March 2018, we systematically searched the websites of the National Council of Medically Assisted Procreation and of the National Ethics Council for Life Sciences. We carried out a thematic content analysis of 25 documents. Results indicate that the debate was focused on accessibility, anonymity and donors' compensation and, to a lesser extent, on professional responsibilities. We observed heterogeneous positions and tensions between multiple rights and ethical principles associated with recipients, donor-conceived individuals and donors. These invoke three similar arguments: the scarcity of scientific evidence; experiences from other countries; and regulations from in international entities. Literature addressed additional topics, namely: a double track that combines donor anonymity/identification; the implementation of reproduction registries for recipients and donors; limits to the genetic screening of donors; donations by family members/acquaintances; and donors' role in decisions regarding the fate of cryopreserved embryos and in choosing the characteristics of recipients of their gametes. There is room to expand the debate and to promote research on the social and ethical implications of gamete donation, considering the participation of all citizens.

Conhecer a discussão em torno dos desafios sociais e éticos da doação de gametas é fundamental para a boa governança das técnicas de reprodução assistida. Neste artigo, analisam-se os tópicos que orientaram o debate nas organizações de ética portuguesas, discutindo as suas conexões com os temas abordados internacionalmente. Para tal, em março de 2018, pesquisamos sistematicamente os websites do Conselho Nacional de Procriação Medicamente Assistida e do Conselho Nacional de Ética para as Ciências da Vida. Procedemos à análise de conteúdo temática de 25 documentos. Os resultados indicam que o debate se centrou na acessibilidade, no anonimato e na compensação de doadores e, em menor extensão, nas responsabilidades profissionais. Observaram-se posicionamentos heterogêneos e tensões entre múltiplos direitos e princípios éticos associados a receptores, a pessoas nascidas com recurso à doação de gametas e a doadores. Esses têm em comum três alegações: a escassez de evidência científica; as experiências de outros países; e regulamentações oriundas de entidades internacionais. Na literatura abordam-se tópicos adicionais, nomeadamente: uma via dupla que conjugue anonimato/identificação de doadores; implementação de sistemas de registo reprodutivo para receptores e doadores; limites do rastreio genético a doadores; doação por familiares/conhecidos; e o papel dos doadores na decisão quanto ao destino de embriões criopreservados e na escolha das características dos receptores dos seus gametas. Há espaço para expandir o debate e promover a pesquisa em torno das implicações sociais e éticas da doação de gametas, considerando a participação de todos os cidadãos.

Conocer la discusión en torno a los desafíos sociales y éticos de la donación de gametos es fundamental para el buen gobierno de las técnicas de reproducción asistida. En este artículo se analizan los temas que orientaron el debate en las organizaciones de ética portuguesas, discutiendo sus conexiones con los temas abordados internacionalmente. Para este fin, en marzo de 2018, investigamos sistemáticamente las páginas webs del Conselho Nacional de Procriação Medicamente Assistida y del Conselho Nacional de Ética para as Ciências da Vida. Asimismo, procedimos al análisis de contenido temático de 25 documentos. Los resultados indican que el debate se centró en la accesibilidad, anonimato y compensación de donadores y, en menor extensión, en las responsabilidades profesionales. Se observaron posicionamientos heterogéneos y tensiones entre múltiples derechos y principios éticos, asociados a receptores, a personas nacidas gracias a la donación de gametos y a donadores. Estos tienen en común tres alegaciones: la escasez de evidencias científicas; las experiencias de otros países; y las regulaciones procedentes de entidades internacionales. En el literatura se abordan temas adicionales, en particular: una vía doble que conjugue anonimato/identificación de donadores; implementación de sistemas de registro reproductivo para receptores y donadores; límites del rastreo genético a donadores; donación por familiares/conocidos; y el papel de los donadores en la decisión respecto al destino de embriones criopreservados y en la elección de las características de los receptores de sus gametos. Existe espacio para abrir más el debate y promover la investigación en torno de las implicaciones sociales y éticas de la donación de gametos, considerando la participación de todos los ciudadanos.

Investigating knowledge and perceptions of egg sharing among healthcare professionals in the United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine the healthcare professionals knowledge and opinions of egg sharing and does this potentially effect egg sharing numbers in the UK? STUDY DESIGN: 304 healthcare professionals undertook a large, in-depth survey about various topics related to egg sharing. This included ranking key benefits and issues related to egg sharing. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS. RESULTS: 63.1% of respondents had little or no knowledge of egg sharing, although the majority supported the scheme once a short description was provided. Although attitudes towards egg sharing were positive, there was more support for voluntary donation. The issues surrounding egg sharing of most concern were the psychological well-being of the egg sharer if her own treatment is unsuccessful and the concern that giving away half her eggs reduces IVF success rates. Only 16.5% of respondents had previously referred a patient for egg sharing, with the majority citing lack of knowledge for the reason they hadn't referred. CONCLUSIONS: Egg sharing allows women to receive free or subsidised IVF in exchange for donating half their oocytes collected to a recipient. Although egg sharing was intended to solve the current donor oocyte shortage, egg sharing numbers have fallen over recent years. Education of healthcare professionals about the egg sharing programme and the research that supports it could improve their perceptions of egg sharing, increasing referral rates and egg sharing numbers.

[Regulación de la donación de gametos y embriones en las técnicas de reproducción humana asistida: ¿anónima o abierta?]

The use of donated gametes and embryos in assisted reproduction techniques (ART) makes it necessary to examine interests that involve relevant ethical and legal considerations, which include the autonomy and privacy rights of the intended parents, donors' right to privacy and the right of the minors to know their genetic origin. This article presents arguments to consider policies of more openness to obtain information from donors in order to protect the child's best interest in knowing his/her genetic origins. It concludes with the situation in Mexico, where ART has been carried out with donated gametes since several years ago; however, due to the absence of regulations to control these procedures, each establishment imposes its own criteria for the operation of its programs.

El uso de gametos y embriones donados en técnicas de reproducción humana asistida hace necesario examinar intereses que implican consideraciones éticas y jurídicas relevantes, y estos incluyen los derechos de autonomía y privacidad de los padres de intención, el derecho a la privacidad de los donantes y el derecho de los menores a conocer su origen genético. En este artículo se exponen argumentos para considerar políticas de mayor apertura para la obtención de información de los donantes en aras de proteger el interés superior del niño y la niña a conocer sus orígenes genéticos. Concluye con la problemática en México, donde desde hace varios años se realizan técnicas de reproducción humana asistida con gametos donados, sin embargo, debido a la ausencia de una normatividad que regule estos procedimientos, cada establecimiento impone sus criterios para el funcionamiento de sus programas.

Demarcating the dirty work: Canadian Fertility professionals' use of boundary-work in contentious egg donation.

The potential medical risks to egg donors, in addition to the concern over the commodification of life, has led to debates surrounding the ethics of paying donors. In Canada, payment for eggs is prohibited by law; however, what is considered payment is contentious and has yet to be defined. The lack of legislative clarity coupled with increased ethical concerns over paying a donor has shifted egg donation from a medically-controlled procedure to a legal and social endeavor involving multiple professionals. Through semi-structured interviews with 52 medical and non-medical fertility practitioners, I show how medical practitioners use boundary-work to remove their practice from the ethical and legal debates surrounding egg donation, the "dirty work". I examine how the medical profession relies on discourses of "practicing science" to present their work as favorable and removed from current debates and potential legal ramifications. In showing how medical practitioners rely on boundary-work to distinguish their work from non-scientific and non-medical activities, I expand Gieryn's original conceptualization of boundary-work to demonstrate how medical practitioners can selectively draw on their practice of science to remove their work from ethically and legally contentious issues, the dirty work.

Doação de gametas: questões sociais e éticas (não) respondidas em Portugal / Gamete donation: (un)answered social and ethical issues in Portugal / Donación de gametos: cuestiones sociales y éticas (no) respondidas en Portugal

Resumo: Conhecer a discussão em torno dos desafios sociais e éticos da doação de gametas é fundamental para a boa governança das técnicas de reprodução assistida. Neste artigo, analisam-se os tópicos que orientaram o debate nas organizações de ética portuguesas, discutindo as suas conexões com os temas abordados internacionalmente. Para tal, em março de 2018, pesquisamos sistematicamente os websites do Conselho Nacional de Procriação Medicamente Assistida e do Conselho Nacional de Ética para as Ciências da Vida. Procedemos à análise de conteúdo temática de 25 documentos. Os resultados indicam que o debate se centrou na acessibilidade, no anonimato e na compensação de doadores e, em menor extensão, nas responsabilidades profissionais. Observaram-se posicionamentos heterogêneos e tensões entre múltiplos direitos e princípios éticos associados a receptores, a pessoas nascidas com recurso à doação de gametas e a doadores. Esses têm em comum três alegações: a escassez de evidência científica; as experiências de outros países; e regulamentações oriundas de entidades internacionais. Na literatura abordam-se tópicos adicionais, nomeadamente: uma via dupla que conjugue anonimato/identificação de doadores; implementação de sistemas de registo reprodutivo para receptores e doadores; limites do rastreio genético a doadores; doação por familiares/conhecidos; e o papel dos doadores na decisão quanto ao destino de embriões criopreservados e na escolha das características dos receptores dos seus gametas. Há espaço para expandir o debate e promover a pesquisa em torno das implicações sociais e éticas da doação de gametas, considerando a participação de todos os cidadãos.

Abstract: Awareness of the discussion surrounding the social and ethical challenges regarding gamete donation is crucial for good governance of assisted reproduction techniques. In this article, we analyze the topics that guided the debate in the Portuguese ethics organizations, discussing their connections with themes addressed internationally. To that end, in March 2018, we systematically searched the websites of the National Council of Medically Assisted Procreation and of the National Ethics Council for Life Sciences. We carried out a thematic content analysis of 25 documents. Results indicate that the debate was focused on accessibility, anonymity and donors' compensation and, to a lesser extent, on professional responsibilities. We observed heterogeneous positions and tensions between multiple rights and ethical principles associated with recipients, donor-conceived individuals and donors. These invoke three similar arguments: the scarcity of scientific evidence; experiences from other countries; and regulations from in international entities. Literature addressed additional topics, namely: a double track that combines donor anonymity/identification; the implementation of reproduction registries for recipients and donors; limits to the genetic screening of donors; donations by family members/acquaintances; and donors' role in decisions regarding the fate of cryopreserved embryos and in choosing the characteristics of recipients of their gametes. There is room to expand the debate and to promote research on the social and ethical implications of gamete donation, considering the participation of all citizens.

Resumen: Conocer la discusión en torno a los desafíos sociales y éticos de la donación de gametos es fundamental para el buen gobierno de las técnicas de reproducción asistida. En este artículo se analizan los temas que orientaron el debate en las organizaciones de ética portuguesas, discutiendo sus conexiones con los temas abordados internacionalmente. Para este fin, en marzo de 2018, investigamos sistemáticamente las páginas webs del Conselho Nacional de Procriação Medicamente Assistida y del Conselho Nacional de Ética para as Ciências da Vida. Asimismo, procedimos al análisis de contenido temático de 25 documentos. Los resultados indican que el debate se centró en la accesibilidad, anonimato y compensación de donadores y, en menor extensión, en las responsabilidades profesionales. Se observaron posicionamientos heterogéneos y tensiones entre múltiples derechos y principios éticos, asociados a receptores, a personas nacidas gracias a la donación de gametos y a donadores. Estos tienen en común tres alegaciones: la escasez de evidencias científicas; las experiencias de otros países; y las regulaciones procedentes de entidades internacionales. En el literatura se abordan temas adicionales, en particular: una vía doble que conjugue anonimato/identificación de donadores; implementación de sistemas de registro reproductivo para receptores y donadores; límites del rastreo genético a donadores; donación por familiares/conocidos; y el papel de los donadores en la decisión respecto al destino de embriones criopreservados y en la elección de las características de los receptores de sus gametos. Existe espacio para abrir más el debate y promover la investigación en torno de las implicaciones sociales y éticas de la donación de gametos, considerando la participación de todos los ciudadanos.