Anonymity in third party reproduction: an old dilemma in new packaging?

InGameteDonorAnonymity andLimits ofNumbers ofOffspring:TheViews ofThree Stakeholders,1 Margaret K. Nelson, Rosanna Hertz, and Wendy Kramer, present empirical data on the attitudes of gamete donors,2 intended parents,3 and donor-conceived persons toward both donor anonymity and limits on the number of children produced using gametes from any one donor. Consistent with the assisted reproductive technologies (ART) market as a whole, there is no national regulation regarding either of these issues.4 Nelson, Hertz, and Kramer identify anonymity and limits on offspring as two issues currently important in third-party reproduction that are debated by ‘ethicists, legal scholars, and social scientists’.5 Those opposed to anonymity, the authors explain, argue that knowledge of one’s genetic heritage is a right for donor-conceived individuals, especially when concerning access to health information but also as an important identity issue. Opponents to anonymity also express concern about accidental incest that may occur between those who unknowingly share genetic material. The authors cite concerns about ‘inadvertent incest’, ‘the spread of genetic malformations’, and ‘the emotional distress for all parties (parents, donors, and offspring) of knowing that there