Legal Issues and Male Reproduction

doi:10.1017/9781108937054.031

Chapter 29 - Legal Issues and Male Reproduction

from Section 5 - Health Care Systems and Culture

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 08 July 2023

Heather E. Ross

Edited by

Larry I. Lipshultz ,

Stuart S. Howards ,

Craig S. Niederberger and

Dolores J. Lamb

Show author details

Larry I. Lipshultz: Affiliation:
Baylor College of Medicine, Texas
Stuart S. Howards: Affiliation:
University of Virginia
Craig S. Niederberger: Affiliation:
University of Illinois, Chicago
Dolores J. Lamb: Affiliation:
Weill Cornell Medical College, New York

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Physicians caring for male reproductive patients should be aware of potential legal issues that may arise, particularly when dealing with sperm donation, cryopreserved embryos, and postmortem use of sperm. The laws in this area continue to evolve, and in many places remain unsettled or are based on strict compliance with a relevant statute or court practice. Laws vary, depending on the type of fertility treatment provided, as well as by country, province, state, and even counties or districts within a state. Prior to engaging in medical treatment, the physician should, at a minimum, require the patient to consult with an attorney specializing in assisted reproductive technology (ART) to ensure the patient is aware of any and all legal consequences which may arise. Moreover, unlike other areas of medicine where treatment only affects the physician’s patient, physicians who practice ART should also consider the rights of the children and families they are helping to create. This article will explore legal issues that may arise when providing medical treatment in the area of male reproduction.

Type: Chapter
Information: Infertility in the Male , pp. 517 - 524

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108937054.031 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2023

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.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ombelet, W, Van Robays, J. Artificial insemination history: hurdles and milestones. Facts Views Vis ObGyn 2015;7:137–43.Google Scholar PubMed

Sieglein v. Schmidt, 224 Md. App. 222 (2015), citing to Orford v. Orford, 58 D.L.R. 251 (1921).Google Scholar

Uniform Law Commission. Parentage Act (1973). 1973. Available from: www.uniformlaws.org/committees/community-home?CommunityKey=10720858-ebe1-4e85-a275-40210e3f3f87.Google Scholar

Uniform Law Commission. Parentage Act (2002) (as revised in 2000 and amended in 2002). 2002. Available from: www.uniformlaws.org/committees/community-home?CommunityKey=5d5c48d6-623f-4d01-9994-6933ca8af315.Google Scholar

National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. Uniform Parentage Act (2017). 2017. Available from: cqrcengage.com/arkbar/file/pYOqTypmr29/UPA2017_Final_2017sep22.pdf.Google Scholar

Uniform Law Commission. Parentage Act (2017). 2017. Available from: www.uniformlaws.org/committees/community-home?CommunityKey=c4f37d2d-4d20-4be0-8256-22dd73af068f.Google Scholar

National Conference on Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. Uniform Parentage Act (last amended [2017]). Article 7, Assisted reproduction other than surrogacy. Section 701, Scope of article. 2007. Available from: www.uniformlaws.org/HigherLogic/System/DownloadDocumentFile.ashx?DocumentFileKey=238dfcf5-eb39-47d0-bfb7-d0ea50c52c63&forceDialog=0. [This article does not apply to the birth of a child conceived by means of sexual intercourse.]Google Scholar

State of Kansas ex. rel. v. W.M. (Dist. Court Kansas 11/22/2016 Case No. 2007-DM-568). Available from: eu.cjonline.com/story/news/crime/2016/11/28/shawnee-county-judge-topeka-sperm-donor-william-marotta-not-legally-child-s-father/16565815007/.Google Scholar

In re P.S., 2016 BL 359369, Tex. Ct. App., No. 02-16- 00008-CV (10/27/16).Google Scholar

Okoli v. Okoli, 81 Mass. App. Ct. 371 (2012).Google Scholar

Sieglein v. Schmidt, 224 Md. App. 222 (2015)Google Scholar

750 ILCS 40/3 (repealed by P.A. 99-763).Google Scholar

750 ILCS 46/703 (2017).Google Scholar

Obergefell v. Hodges 135 S. Ct. 2584 (2015).Google Scholar

McLaughlin v. Jones, 2017 WL 4126939 (Ariz., 2016).Google Scholar

Pavan v. Smith 137 S. Ct. 2075 (2017).Google Scholar

Wilkins, CL. How to talk with kids about their unique conception. 2008. Available from: lafamilybuilding.com/wordpress/articles/.Google Scholar

The Donor Sibling Registry. Available from: www.donorsiblingregistry.com/.Google Scholar

Cahn, N. Do tell! The rights of donor-conceived offspring. Available from: www.hofstralawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/CC1.Cahn_.final2_.pdf. [Several useful sources exist to obtain information regarding donor gametes and disclosure to donor conceived children – see Donor Conception Network (available from: www.dcnetwork.org); RESOLVE: The National Infertility Association (available from: www.resolve.org); Family Equality Council (available from: www.path2parenthood.org); and Parents Via Egg Donation Organization (available from: www.pved.org).]Google Scholar

Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Defining embryo donation: an Ethics Committee Opinion. Fertil Steril 2016;106:56–8. Available from: www.asrm.org/news-and-publications/ethics-committee-documents/.Google Scholar

La. Rev. Stat. Ann. Sections 9:131–131.Google Scholar

McQueen v. Gadberry 507 S.W.3d 127 (Mo. App. E.D., 2016).Google Scholar

A.R.S. § 25-318.03.Google Scholar

Szafranski v. Dunston, 34 N.E. 3d 1132 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015).Google Scholar

Report and Recommendations of Master in Chancery, In the Estate of Yenenesh Abayneh Desta, Deceased, No. PR 12-2856-1, Prob. Ct. No. 1, Dallas County, Texas.Google Scholar

Astrue v. Capato, 566 U.S. 541 (2012).Google Scholar

Ross, HE. Legal and ethical aspects of male reproduction. In: Skinner, MK, ed. Encyclopedia of Reproduction, 2nd ed, Vol. 4. Boston, MA: Academic Press, 2018; pp. 164–7. Available from: www.elsevier.com/books/encyclopedia-of-reproduction/skinner/978-0-12-811899-3.Google Scholar

Journal of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, Crockin, Susan, July 29, 2015 (pp. 64–8).Google Scholar

Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Posthumous retrieval and use of gametes or embryos: an Ethics Committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2018;110:45–9.Google Scholar

Mogharei, P. Conned heir. 2019. Available from: www.chicagomag.com/chicago-magazine/february-2019/from-the-vault-conned-heir/.Google Scholar

American Bar Association. American Bar Association Model Act Governing Assisted Reproductive Technology [2019]. 2019. Available from: www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/family_law/committees/art/resolution-111.pdf.Google Scholar

Illinois General Assembly. 750 ILCS 46/706 Illinois Parentage Act. 2015 (amended 2017). Available from: www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs5.asp?ActID=3638&ChapterID=59.Google Scholar