Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-fqc5m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-19T11:03:48.131Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Compensation for Gamete Donation: The Analogy with Jury Duty

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 December 2006

LYNETTE REID
Affiliation:
Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
NATALIE RAM
Affiliation:
Yale Law School, New Haven Connecticut
R. BLAKE BROWN
Affiliation:
Saint Mary's University and Gorsebrook Institute for Atlantic Canada Studies in Halifax, Nova Scotia

Extract

In Canada, laws and policies consistently reject the commodification of human organs and tissues, and Canadian practice is consistent with international standards in this regard. Until the Assisted Human Reproduction (AHR) Act of 2004, gamete donation in Canada was an exception: Canadians could pay and be paid open market rates for gametes (sperm and egg) for use in in vitro fertilization (IVF). As sections of the AHR Act forbidding payment for gametes (Section 6) and permitting only reimbursement of receipted expenses (Section 12) gradually came into effect in 2005, Canada did away with this anomaly. Medical practice and legal prohibitions in assisted human reproduction are now consistent with other areas of medicine where tissues and organs are taken from one person to benefit others: Altruistic donation, rather than selling and buying, will be the norm.The authors thank Françoise Baylis, Jocelyn Downie, and members of the Novel Tech Ethics Research Team at Dalhousie University for their assistance with and feedback on earlier drafts of this paper. We also thank Tim Krahn for assistance in formatting this paper.

Type
SPECIAL SECTION: OPEN FORUM
Copyright
© 2007 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)