290:
members of the donor's family would be denied. While extraction of the sperm was guaranteed following a request by the partner, permission to use the sperm was to be determined case by case, a court of law deciding on the basis of the effect on the presumed wishes of the donor, and the effect of the procedure on the donor's dignity. If it could be demonstrated that the deceased took definite steps towards parenthood (implied consent), use of extracted sperm by the female partner would generally be permitted.
86:
356:
Finally, if the procedure is performed and results in a birth, there are several issues involving the legal rights of the child and its mother. Because posthumous insemination can take place months or even years after the father's death, it can in some cases be difficult to prove the paternity of the
289:
published several guidelines outlining the legal situation of posthumous sperm retrieval for the purpose of later insemination by a surviving female partner. The guidelines specified firstly that only requests by a partner (married or otherwise) of the deceased would be honoured – requests by other
132:
or method of extraction. Up to this limit, the procedure has a high success rate, with sperm retrieved in nearly 100% of cases, and motile sperm in 80–90%. There is currently little precedent for successful insemination using sperm harvested after 36 hours. New technologies are being researched that
96:
The first successful retrieval of sperm from a cadaver was reported in 1980, in a case involving a 30-year-old man who became brain dead following a motor vehicle accident and whose family requested sperm preservation. The first successful conception using sperm retrieved post-mortem was reported in
352:
Consent of the donor is a further ethical barrier. Even in jurisdictions where explicit or implicit consent is not required, there are occasions in which clinicians have refused to perform the procedure on these grounds. If no proof of consent by the donor can be produced, implied consent, often in
97:
1998, leading to a successful birth the following year. Since 1980, a number of requests for the procedure have been made, with around one third approved and performed. Gametes have been extracted through a variety of means, including removal of the
159:
The legality of posthumous sperm extraction varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Generally, legislation falls into one of three camps: a full ban, a requirement of written consent from the donor, or implied consent obtained from the family.
493:
353:
the form of prior actions, must be evident for clinicians to proceed with the extraction. Sperm retrieval is rarely carried out if there is evidence that the deceased clearly objected to the procedure prior to his death.
497:
580:
184:(Center for the Study and Preservation of Human Sperm) petitioned the courts successfully for a full ban on posthumous insemination, in line with the country's ban on
644:
240:
236:
648:
306:, have no specific legislation regarding the rights of people on gamete donation following their death, leaving the decision in the hands of individual
314:. As such, many medical institutions in such countries institute in-house policies regarding circumstances in which the procedure would be performed.
545:
326:. The ones most often debated concern religion, consent, and the rights of the surviving partner and child if the procedure results in a birth.
494:"When is posthumous sperm retrieval ethically permissible and what are the ethical implications of conceiving a child this way? | Anorkey"
61:
after the death of the donor. While religious objections have been made even under these circumstances, far more censure has arisen regarding
601:
Landau, R (2004) "Posthumous sperm retrieval for the purpose of later insemination or IVF in Israel: an ethical and psychosocial critique",
245:
345:
prohibition on deriving personal benefit from a corpse, and in the case of those in a persistent vegetative state, their categorisation as
620:
181:
62:
682:
180:
patient Alain
Parpalaix obtained permission from the courts to be inseminated with her husband's spermatozoa after his death, the
137:
89:
117:. Since the procedure is rarely performed, studies on the efficacy of the various methods have been fairly limited in scope.
692:
373:, impose a maximum term for the use of extracted sperm, after which the father will not be legally recognised on the child's
663:
Grazi, R V; Wolowelsky J B. (1995) "The Use of
Cryopreserved Sperm and Pre-embryos In Contemporary Jewish Law and Ethics",
349:(dying person) prohibits anyone from touching or moving them for anything that does not relate to their immediate care.
687:
323:
74:
454:
Strong, C; Gingrich, JR; Kutteh, WH (2000), "Ethics of sperm retrieval after death or persistent vegetative state,"
415:
257:
charges could be (but in this case were not) brought against doctors for overseeing or performing the procedure.
106:
697:
434:
54:
151:
fertilisation remains unchanged regardless of whether the sperm was retrieved from a living or dead donor.
141:
542:
261:
128:
sperm has been successfully obtained as late as 36 hours after death, generally regardless of the
569:
169:
268:
212:
628:
456:
322:
Several ethical issues surround the extraction and use of gametes from cadavers or patients in a
286:
121:
114:
476:
Shefi S et al. (2006) "Posthumous sperm retrieval: Analysis of time interval to harvest sperm",
565:
374:
330:
216:
38:. There has been significant debate over the ethics and legality of the procedure, and on the
617:
632:
386:
283:
27:
624:
549:
271:
in 1997 requiring written consent by the donor in 1998, but it was never passed into law.
77:, particularly when the procedure is carried out without explicit consent from the donor.
702:
370:
264:
232:
129:
239:. The Act dictates that explicit written consent by the donor must be provided to the
676:
645:
Instruction on respect for human life in its origin and on the dignity of procreation
585:
362:
303:
243:
in order for extraction and fertilisation to take place. Following the 1997 case of
341:
fertilisation, namely the rights of the unborn. Judaic strictures are based on the
110:
70:
39:
432:
Rothman, CM (1980) "A method for obtaining viable sperm in the postmortem state."
365:
between partners) can be affected. For this reason, several countries, including
581:"Life after death – New York state moves to keep dead men's sperm in the family"
413:
Orr, RD; Siegler, M (2002) Is posthumous semen retrieval ethically permissible?
391:
358:
35:
124:
recommends that extraction take place no later than 24 hours after death,
102:
98:
58:
92:, the most common method of fertilisation using posthumously extracted sperm.
208:
189:
47:
361:
and even the legal rights of the child to marry (due to the possibility of
133:
could make this a routine reality, in turn creating new ethical dilemmas.
337:. Roman Catholicism proscribes the procedure on much the same grounds as
311:
125:
31:
342:
334:
299:
254:
196:
66:
366:
307:
280:
228:
204:
200:
177:
173:
43:
329:
Some major religions prohibit posthumous sperm retrieval, including
136:
If the sperm is viable, fertilisation is generally achieved through
84:
260:
There are few other jurisdictions that fall into this category.
250:
85:
53:
Cases of post-mortem conception have occurred ever since human
553:
227:
Guidelines outlining the legal use of posthumously extracted
246:
16:
Extraction of spermatozoa from a legally dead person
665:
566:
182:Centre d’Etude et de Conservation du Sperme Humain
57:techniques were devised, via sperm donation to a
651:, February 22, 1987. Retrieved June 28, 2007.
8:
241:Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority
237:Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990
649:Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
612:
610:
526:Bahadur, G (2002) "Death and conception",
597:
595:
522:
520:
518:
516:
514:
42:of the child and surviving parent if the
603:Human Reproduction 2004 19(9):1952–1956
556:, May 30, 2001. Retrieved June 28, 2007.
450:
448:
249:, the terms of the Act were extended to
659:
657:
589:(21 March 1998. Retrieved 28 June 2007)
472:
470:
403:
570:Schedule 3, Paragraph 5
409:
407:
7:
14:
176:, in which the widow of deceased
298:Many other countries, including
138:intracytoplasmic sperm injection
90:intracytoplasmic sperm injection
543:"62-year-old woman gives birth"
275:Areas requiring implied consent
253:patients, and so theoretically
223:Areas requiring written consent
195:Similar legislation exists in
1:
528:Human Reproduction Oct 2002;
324:persistent vegetative state
75:persistent vegetative state
719:
26:) is a procedure in which
20:Posthumous sperm retrieval
635:hospitals for an example.
28:spermatozoa are collected
683:Medical aspects of death
478:Human Reproduction 2006;
34:of a human corpse after
188:fertilisation for post-
55:artificial insemination
147:. The success rate of
93:
69:or patients either on
693:Reproductive coercion
235:were laid out in the
88:
65:retrieval from fresh
164:Areas with full bans
168:Following the 1984
113:, and rectal probe
688:Fertility medicine
629:Cornell University
623:2007-08-16 at the
548:2007-08-10 at the
457:Human Reproduction
287:Elyakim Rubinstein
122:medical literature
115:electroejaculation
94:
583:; Cohen, Philip;
375:birth certificate
331:Roman Catholicism
217:Western Australia
710:
667:
661:
652:
642:
636:
614:
605:
599:
590:
578:
572:
563:
557:
540:
534:
524:
509:
508:
506:
505:
496:. Archived from
490:
484:
474:
465:
452:
443:
430:
424:
411:
387:Posthumous birth
357:child. As such,
284:Attorney General
262:New York senator
718:
717:
713:
712:
711:
709:
708:
707:
673:
672:
671:
670:
662:
655:
643:
639:
625:Wayback Machine
615:
608:
600:
593:
579:
575:
568:, specifically
564:
560:
550:Wayback Machine
541:
537:
525:
512:
503:
501:
492:
491:
487:
475:
468:
453:
446:
435:Fertil. Steril.
431:
427:
412:
405:
400:
383:
320:
296:
277:
225:
166:
157:
83:
17:
12:
11:
5:
716:
714:
706:
705:
700:
698:Sperm donation
695:
690:
685:
675:
674:
669:
668:
653:
637:
606:
591:
573:
558:
535:
532:(10):2769–2775
510:
485:
482:(11):2890–2893
466:
444:
425:
402:
401:
399:
396:
395:
394:
389:
382:
379:
371:United Kingdom
319:
316:
295:
294:No legislation
292:
276:
273:
265:Roy M. Goodman
233:United Kingdom
224:
221:
170:Parpalaix case
165:
162:
156:
153:
130:cause of death
82:
79:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
715:
704:
701:
699:
696:
694:
691:
689:
686:
684:
681:
680:
678:
666:
660:
658:
654:
650:
646:
641:
638:
634:
630:
626:
622:
619:
613:
611:
607:
604:
598:
596:
592:
588:
587:
586:New Scientist
582:
577:
574:
571:
567:
562:
559:
555:
551:
547:
544:
539:
536:
533:
531:
523:
521:
519:
517:
515:
511:
500:on 2013-05-05
499:
495:
489:
486:
483:
481:
473:
471:
467:
464:
462:
458:
451:
449:
445:
442:
440:
436:
429:
426:
423:
421:
417:
410:
408:
404:
397:
393:
390:
388:
385:
384:
380:
378:
376:
372:
368:
364:
363:consanguinity
360:
354:
350:
348:
344:
340:
336:
332:
327:
325:
317:
315:
313:
309:
305:
304:United States
301:
293:
291:
288:
285:
282:
274:
272:
270:
266:
263:
258:
256:
252:
248:
247:
242:
238:
234:
230:
222:
220:
218:
214:
210:
206:
202:
198:
193:
191:
187:
183:
179:
175:
171:
163:
161:
154:
152:
150:
146:
145:fertilisation
144:
139:
134:
131:
127:
123:
118:
116:
112:
108:
104:
100:
91:
87:
80:
78:
76:
72:
68:
64:
60:
56:
51:
49:
46:are used for
45:
41:
37:
33:
29:
25:
21:
664:
640:
627:provided by
602:
584:
576:
561:
538:
529:
527:
502:. Retrieved
498:the original
488:
479:
477:
460:
455:
438:
433:
428:
419:
416:J Med Ethics
414:
355:
351:
346:
338:
328:
321:
297:
278:
259:
244:
226:
194:
185:
167:
158:
148:
142:
140:, a form of
135:
119:
111:vas deferens
95:
71:life support
52:
48:impregnation
40:legal rights
23:
19:
18:
631:to various
463:(4):739–745
392:Sperm theft
359:inheritance
267:proposed a
36:brain death
677:Categories
618:guidelines
504:2013-05-24
398:References
211:states of
209:Australian
190:menopausal
107:aspiration
103:irrigation
99:epididymis
59:sperm bank
312:hospitals
279:In 2003,
30:from the
633:New York
621:Archived
546:Archived
441:(5):512.
422::299–302
381:See also
369:and the
343:halakhic
339:in vitro
302:and the
251:comatose
213:Victoria
207:and the
186:in vitro
155:Legality
149:in vitro
143:in vitro
73:or in a
67:cadavers
63:invasive
335:Judaism
308:clinics
300:Belgium
281:Israeli
255:assault
231:in the
229:gametes
197:Germany
192:women.
109:of the
44:gametes
367:Israel
347:gosses
318:Ethics
205:Taiwan
201:Sweden
178:cancer
174:France
126:motile
120:While
32:testes
703:Semen
459:2000;
437:1980;
418:2002;
81:Cases
616:See
333:and
310:and
269:bill
215:and
554:CNN
172:in
105:or
24:PSR
679::
656:^
647:,
609:^
594:^
552:,
530:17
513:^
480:21
469:^
461:15
447:^
439:34
420:28
406:^
377:.
219:.
203:,
199:,
101:,
50:.
507:.
22:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
