Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Consent agreements for cryopreserved embryos: the case for choice

By Peter D. Sozou, Sally Sheldon and Geraldine M. Hartshorne


Under current UK law, an embryo cannot be transferred to a woman's uterus without the consent of both of its genetic parents, that is both of the people from whose gametes the embryo was created. This consent can be withdrawn at any time before the embryo transfer procedure. Withdrawal of consent by one genetic parent can result in the other genetic parent losing the opportunity to have their own genetic children. We argue that offering couples only one type of consent agreement, as happens at present, is too restrictive. An alternative form of agreement, in which one genetic parent agrees to forego the right to future withdrawal of consent, should be available alongside the current form of agreement. Giving couples such a choice will better enable them to store embryos under a consent agreement that is appropriate for their circumstances. Allowing such a choice, with robust procedures in place to ensure the validity of consent, is the best way to respect patient autonom

Topics: RG Gynecology and obstetrics
Publisher: Journal of medical Ethics
Year: 2010
DOI identifier: 10.1136/jme.2009.033373
OAI identifier:
Provided by: LSE Research Online

Suggested articles


  1. (2004). Children raised in fatherless families from infancy: a follow-up of children of lesbian and single heterosexual mothers at early adolescence. doi
  2. Deciding the fate of disputed embryos: ethical issues in the case of Natallie Evans. doi
  3. (2008). European Court of Human Rights: consent to IVF treatment. doi
  4. (2004). Evans v Amicus Healthcare; Hadley v Midland Fertility Servicesdrevealing cracks in the ‘twin pillars’? Child and Family Law Quarterly
  5. (2006). Evans v United Kingdom e judgments of Solomon: power, gender and procreation’. Child and Family Law Quarterly
  6. (2005). Going it alone: solo mothers and their infants conceived by donor insemination. doi
  7. (2008). Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990, as amended. doi
  8. (2007). Human oocyte cryopreservation. Hum Reprod Update doi
  9. (2004). Informed consent and public health. doi
  10. (2003). Natallie Evans v Amicus Healthcare and others
  11. (2004). Natallie Evans v Amicus Healthcare Ltd and Others
  12. (2007). of Human Rights Evans v the United Kingdom (Application no 6339/ 05) Judgment.
  13. On liberty. doi
  14. (2009). Oocyte vitrification e women’s emancipation set in stone. Fertil Steril doi
  15. (2007). The Natalie Evans Case.
  16. (1960). The strategy of conflict. doi
  17. (2010). Withdrawal of consent by sperm donors. doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.