Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T04:47:49.908Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Semen Banking and Artificial Insemination by Donor in France: Social and Medical Discourse

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2009

Simone B. Novaes
Simone B. Novaes
Affiliation:
CNRS-IRESCO Centre de Sociologie de I'Ethique, Paris
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Artificial insemination with donor semen (AID) has recently come into public view—particularly in France—because of its association with a newer technique, the cryopreservation of semen. One of the oldest and simplest of reproductive techniques, used most frequently as a means of compensating for male infertility, artificial insemination was previously confined to the private clinician's office, where maximum confidentiality could be ensured. This shielded all of the parties involved—recipients, donor, and physician—from moral reprobation and the possible legal complications arising from the use of donor sperm. However, in the mid-twentieth century, some physicians and researchers in cyrogenics came up with the idea that the freezing and stocking of donor semen in banks might greatly improve the psychological conditions and facilitate the material arrangements for performing AID. Essentially, the donor's availability would no longer have to coincide with the woman's ovulation, meaning less inconvenience for the donor, more time for screening his medical history and running the necessary tests on his semen, and possibly a certain tempering of AID's adulterous connotations. Although results with frozen semen were not as satisfactory as with fresh (the probability of a pregnancy at any cycle is almost twice as great with fresh semen), the material and psychological benefits were considered greatly to outweigh the lesser efficiency of frozen sperm.

Type
The Cultural Shaping of Biomedical Science and Technology
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 2 , Issue 2 , February 1986 , pp. 219 - 229
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

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.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Bunge, R. G., Keetel, W. C., & Sherman, J. K.Clinical use of frozen semen: report of four cases. Fertility, Sterility, 1954, 5, 520.Google Scholar
2.Contrucci, J.Mères porteuses: les défis du Docteur Geller. Le Monde, 10 avril 1985.Google Scholar
3.Curie-Cohen, M., Luttrel, M. S., & Shapiro, S.Current practice of artificial insemination by donors in the United States. The New England Journal of Medicine, 1979, 11, 585–90.Google Scholar
4.Czyba, J. C., & Manuel, C.Artificial insemination with donor sperm. The French experience. Scientific World, 1981, 4, 21–24.Google Scholar
5.Da Lage, C., Alnot, M. O., Granet, P., & de Parseval, G. Les donneurs de sperme. In Conseil Supérieur de l'Information Sexuelle, de la Régulation des Naissances et de l'Education Familiale (eds.), Colloque International: Les pères aujourd hui, Paris: INED, 1982, 68–72.Google Scholar
6.Dajoux, R.L'insémination, l'espoir. Préface par le Prof. A. Netter, Marseille: Mediprint, 1979.Google Scholar
7.David, G.Les banques de sperme en France. Archives Françaises de Pédiatrie, 1975, 32, 401–4.Google Scholar
8.David, G. Don et utilisation de sperme. Actes du Colloque: Génétique, Procréation et Droit, Arles: Actes Sud, 1985, 203–24.Google Scholar
9.David, G.L'Organisation des CECOS: le don de sperme, Gynécologie, 1976, 27, 143–44.Google Scholar
10.David, G., & Lansac, J. The organization of the centers for the study and the preservation of semen in France. In David, G. & Price, W. S. (eds.), Human artificial insemination and semen preservation. New York: Plenum Press, 1980, 15–25.Google Scholar
11. Dix années de CECOS en France: une réussite technique mais persistance d'un vide juridique pour les enfants nés par insémination artificielle, Panorama du Médecin, no. 1611, 16 mars 1983.Google Scholar
12.Frankel, M.The public policy dimensions of artificial insemination and human semen cryobanking. Washington D.C.: George Washington University (Monograph 18—Program of Policy Studies in Science and Technology), 1973.Google Scholar
13.Frankel, M.Artificial insemination and semen cryobanking: Health and safety concerns and the role of professional standards, law and public policy. Legal Medical Quarterly, 1979, 3, 93–100.Google Scholar
14.Geller, S. “CECOS et CEFER: pas de polémique”, Le Quotidien du Médecin, no. 2930, 29–30 avril 1983.Google Scholar
15.Geller, S.Delendum est CEFER? Lettre ouverte au Sénateur Caillavet par le Dr S. Geller. Panorama du Médecin, no. 683, 16 Janvier 1979.Google Scholar
16.Geller, S.Don gratuit ou payant? la réponse de CEFER. Gynéccologie et Obstétrique, 15 05 1984.Google Scholar
17.Geller, S., Ayme, Y., Dajoux, R., & Lemasson, C.L'Insémination Artificielle: possibilités nouvelles offertes par les banques de sperme. Méditerranée Médicale, 1975, 52, 11–20.Google Scholar
18.Jondet, M. C. & Netter, A.Les problèmes moraux et médicolégaux de l'insémination artificielle hétérologue. Gazette Médicale de France, 1975, 82, 781–88.Google Scholar
19.Jondet, M. & Netter, A.Organisation d'une banque de sperme: quelques problemes. Gynécologie, 1973, 24, 141–44.Google Scholar
20.Manuel, C. & Czyba, J. C. Ethical, psychological and social issues of technical choices in artificial insemination with donor sperm. Manuscript, 1981.Google Scholar
21.Nau, J. Y.Un Sondage SOFRES-Le Monde-FRANCE INTER: Les Français disent ‘Oui… mais’ à la procréation artificielle. Le Monde, 23 juillet 1985.Google Scholar
22.Netter, A. Banques de sperme. Actualités Gynécologiques, 4e série. Paris: Masson et Cie., 1974, 63–67.Google Scholar
23.Netter, A.Connaissance de la femme. Paris: Ed. Robert Laffont, 1979.Google Scholar
24.Novaes, S. B.Social integration of technical innovation: Sperm banking and AID in France and the United States. Social Science Information, 1985, 24, 569–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25.Olson, J. H. Status of AID and sperm banks in the United States. In David, G. and Price, W. S., (eds.), Human artificial insemination and semen preservation. New York: Plenum Press, 1980, 1–9.Google Scholar
26.Scholler, R.A propos de 1'IAD [lettre], Gynéccologie et Obstétrique, no. 109, 1 juillet 1984.Google Scholar
27.Scholtes, M.Insemination Artificielle: Tout repose sur le “point magique.” Le Quotidien du Médecin, no. 2613, 28 Janvier 1982.Google Scholar
28.Schwartz, D., Mayaux, M. J., Heuche, V., Czyglik, F., & David, G. Importance of insemination timing and frequency of AID. In David, G. and Price, W. S. (eds.), Human artificial insemination and semen preservation. New York: Plenum Press, 1980, 333–40.Google Scholar