11 Siblings Met in Orlando. (2017, January 21). The donor sibling registry. https://donorsiblingregistry.com/success_stories/253CrossRefGoogle Scholar

21 CFR § 1271 (2021)Google Scholar

Adams, D. H., Ullah, S., & de Lacey, S. (2016). Does the removal of anonymity reduce sperm donors in Australia? Journal of Law and Medicine, 23(3), 628–636.Google Scholar

Allan, S. (2016). Donor identification: Victorian legislation gives rights to all donor-conceived people. Family Matters, 98, 43–55. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3010387Google Scholar

Appleton, S. F. (2015). Between the binaries: Exploring the legal boundaries of nonanonymous sperm donation. Family Law Quarterly, 49(1), 93–115. www.jstor.org/stable/24577604" www.jstor.org/stable/24577604Google Scholar

BioNews comment articles written by Wendy Kramer. (n.d.). BioNews. Retrieved June 29, 2021, from www.bionews.org.uk/page_5695” www.bionews.org.uk/page_5695Google Scholar

Bobbie Jo R. v. Traci W., No. 11–1753, 2013 WL 2462173 (W. Va. June 7, 2013)Google Scholar

Borry, P., Rusu, O., & Howard, H. (2013). Genetic testing: Anonymity of sperm donors under threat. Nature, 469, 169. https://doi.org/10.1038/496169eGoogle Scholar

Cahn, N. R. (2009). Necessary subjects: The need for a mandatory national donor gamete databank. DePaul Journal of Health Care Law, 12, 203–228.Google Scholar

Cahn, N. R. (2012). The new kinship. Georgetown Law Journal, 100(2), 367–429. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2018969Google Scholar

Cahn, N. R. (2014a). Do tell! The rights of donor-conceived offspring. Hofstra Law Review, 42(4), 1077–1124. https://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/hlr/vol42/iss4/3Google Scholar

Cahn, N. R. (2014b). The uncertain legal basis for the new kinship. Journal of Family Issues, 36(4), 501–518. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X14563797CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cahn, N. R. (2017). What’s right about knowing? Journal of Law & Biosciences, 4, 377–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3011639Google Scholar

Cahn, N. R. (2018). The new “art” of family: Connecting assisted reproductive technologies & identity rights. University of Illinois Law Review, 2018, 1443–1471.Google Scholar

Cahn, N. R. (2020). Crispr parents and informed consent. Southern Methodist University Science and Technology Law Review, 23(1), 3–30. https://scholar.smu.edu/scitech/vol23/iss1/2Google Scholar

Cahn, N. & Suter, S. (2022a). The art of regulating ART. Chicago-Kent Law Review (96), 29–86.Google Scholar

Cahn, N. & Suter, S. (2022b). Generations later, the rights of donor-conceived people are becoming law. The Hill, https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/3460149-generations-later-the-rights-of-donor-conceived-people-are-becoming-law/?rl=1Google Scholar

California Cryobank. (n.d.). Donor types. www.cryobank.com/how-it-works/donor-types/Google Scholar

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021, April 20). ART Success Rates. www.cdc.gov/art/artdata/index.htmlGoogle Scholar

Cohen, I. G., Coan, T., Ottey, M., & Boyd, C. (2016). Sperm donor anonymity and compensation: An experiment with American sperm donors. Journal of Law & the Biosciences, 3(3), 468–488. https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsw052Google Scholar

Copeland, L. (2017, July 27). Who was she? A DNA test only opened new mysteries. Washington Post. www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/lifestyle/she-thought-she-was-irish-until-a-dna-test-opened-a-100-year-old-mystery/Google Scholar

Crawshaw, M. (2017). Direct-to-consumer DNA testing: The fallout for individuals and their families unexpectedly learning of their donor conception origins. Human Fertility, 21(4), 225–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2017.1339127CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Cryos. (n.d.). ID release or non-ID release sperm donor? www.cryosinternational.com/en-us/us-shop/become-a-donor/become-a-sperm-donor/how-to-become-a-sperm-donor/id-release-or-non-id-release-sperm-donor/Google Scholar

Davies, S. (2020). Queering America’s heteronormative family law through “well-conceived” legislation (or, genetic parents exist and sometimes your kid might want to know them). American Journal of Law & Medicine, 46(1), 89–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098858820919554CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Declaration in Support of a Motion for a Preliminary Injunction (2019) Teuscher v. CCB-NWB, Att. A. para.VIII, E. Wash., No. 19-CV-00204.Google Scholar

Doe v. XYZ Co., 914 N.E.2d 117 (Mass. App. Ct. 2009)Google Scholar

Doe 1 v. Xytex Corp., No. 1:16-CV-1453-TWT, 2017 WL 1036484 (N.D. Ga. Mar. 17, 2017).Google Scholar

Donor Sibling Registry. (n.d.). https://donorsiblingregistry.com/Google Scholar

Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, 542 US 1 (2004)Google Scholar

Elston, S. W. (2020). Swipe right for daddy: Modern marketing of sperm and the need for honesty and transparency in advertising. Journal of Health & Life Sciences Law, 13, 28–56.Google Scholar

Entrikin, J. L. (2020). Family secrets and relational privacy: Protecting not-so-personal, sensitive information from public disclosure. University of Miami Law Review, 74(3), 781–897. https://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr/vol74/iss3/5Google Scholar

Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. (2009). Interests, obligations, and rights of the donor in gamete donation. Fertility and Sterility, 91(1), 22–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.09.062Google Scholar

Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. (2013). Informing offspring of their conception by gamete or embryo donation: A committee opinion. Fertility and Sterility, 100(1), 45–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.02.028Google Scholar

Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. (2014). Interests, obligations, and rights in gamete donation: a committee opinion. Fertility and Sterility, 102(3), 675–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.06.001Google Scholar

Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. (2018). Informing offspring of their conception by gamete or embryo donation: An Ethics Committee opinion. Fertility and Sterility, 109(4), 601–605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.01.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. (2019). Interests, obligations, and rights in gamete and embryo donation: An Ethics Committee opinion. Fertility and Sterility, 111(4), 664–670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.01.018CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Food and Drug Administration. (2019, May 3). Testing donors of human cells, tissues, and cellular and tissue-based products (HCT/P): Specific requirements. www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/safety-availability-biologics/testing-donors-human-cells-tissues-and-cellular-and-tissue-based-products-hctp-specific-requirementsGoogle Scholar

Gan-Or, N. Y. (2020). Reproductive dreams and nightmares: Sperm donation in the age of at-home genetic testing. Loyola University Chicago Law Journal, 51(3), 791–833. https://lawecommons.luc.edu/luclj/vol51/iss3/5Google Scholar

Glazer, E. (2019, July 23). DNA testing forever changed donor conception. Harvard Health publishing. www.health.harvard.edu/blog/dna-testing-forever-changed-donor-conception-2019072317394Google Scholar

Harper, J. C., Kennett, D., & Reisel, D. (2016). The end of donor anonymity: How genetic testing is likely to drive anonymous gamete donation out of business. Human Reproduction, 31(6), 1135–1140. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dew065CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hasday, J. E. (2012). Siblings in law. Vanderbilt Law Review, 65(3), 897–931. https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr/vol65/iss3/4Google Scholar

Ishii, T., & de Miguel Beriain, I. (2022). Shifting to a model of donor conception that entails a communication agreement among the parents, donor, and offspring. BMC Medical Ethics, 23(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-022-00756-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Johnson v. Superior Court, 95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 864 (Cal. App. 2d Dist. 2000).Google Scholar

Johnston, L. (2016, July 3). Sperm donors fear “hi dad” showdown as DNA testing becomes more accessible. Express. www.express.co.uk/life-style/health/685599/Sperm-donors-DNA-testing-biological-father-offspring-anonymityGoogle Scholar

Jones, B. (1993). Do siblings possess constitutional rights? Cornell Law Review, 78(6), 1187–1220. http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr/vol78/iss6/4Google Scholar

Joslin, C. G. (2018). Preface to the UPA (2017). Family Law Quarterly, 52, 437–69.Google Scholar

Kramer, W., & Cahn, N. R. (2013). Finding Our Families: A First-of-Its-Kind Book for Donor-Conceived People and Their Families. Avery Publishing Group.Google Scholar

Mandelbaum, R. (2011). Delicate balances: Assessing the needs and rights of siblings in foster care to maintain their relationships post-adoption. New Mexico Law Review, 41(1), 1–67. https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/nmlr/vol41/iss1/3Google Scholar

Mendoza, B., & Diallo, A. (2020, October 26). The best DNA testing kit. Wirecutter. www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/reviews/best-dna-test/Google Scholar

Mroz, J. (2019, February 16). A mother learns the identity of her child’s grandmother. A sperm bank threatens to sue. NY Times. www.nytimes.com/2019/02/16/health/sperm-donation-dna-testing.htmlGoogle Scholar

Nejaime, D. (2017). The family’s constitution. Constitutional Commentary, 32, 413–448. https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/concomm/280Google Scholar

Perry-Rogers v. Fasano, 715 N.Y.S.2d 19 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dept. 2000)Google Scholar

Post, D. J., McCarthy, S., Sherman, R., & Bayimli, S. (2015). Are you still my family? Post-adoption sibling visitation. Capital University Law Review, 43(2), 307–372.Google Scholar

Reproductive Medicine Associates of Connecticut. (n.d.). Anonymous Egg Donation. www.rmact.com/anonymous-egg-donationGoogle Scholar

Resolve. (n.d.). Infertility coverage by state. https://resolve.org/what-are-my-options/insurance-coverage/infertility-coverage-state/Google Scholar

Rhode Island Title 15, Chapter 8.1, Sections 901 et seq. (2021)Google Scholar

Russell v. Pasik, 178 So. 3d 55 (Fla. 2d Dist. App. 2015)Google Scholar

Samuels, E. J. (2018). An immodest proposal for birth registration in donor-assisted reproduction, in the interest of science and human rights. New Mexico Law Review, 48(3), 416–451. https://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/fac_articles/5Google Scholar

S.B. 6037, 2017–2018 Regular Session (Wash. 2017).Google Scholar

Scharf, R. L. (2015). Separated at adoption: Addressing the challenges of maintaining sibling-of-origin bonds in post-adoption families. UC Davis Journal of Juvenile Law & Policy, 19(1), 84–125. https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/facpub/928Google Scholar

Seattle Sperm Bank. (n.d.). SSB connects. www.seattlespermbank.com/services/ssb-connects/Google Scholar

Sperm Bank of California, The. (n.d.). Identity release program. www.thespermbankofca.org/content/identity-release-programGoogle Scholar

Trachman, E. (2019, February 6). Beware of the home DNA kit! You may find yourself being sued by a sperm bank. Above the Law. https://abovethelaw.com/2019/02/beware-of-the-home-dna-kit-you-may-find-yourself-being-sued-by-a-sperm-bank/Google Scholar

Trachman, E. (2022a). Colorado is poised to pass a groundbreaking Donor-Conceived Person Protection Act. Above the Law. https://abovethelaw.com/2022/05/colorado-is-poised-to-pass-a-groundbreaking-donor-conceived-person-protection-actGoogle Scholar

Trachman, E. (2022b). New York proposes Donor-Conceived Person Protection Act. Above the Law. https://abovethelaw.com/2022/01/new-york-proposes-donor-conceived-person-protection-act/Google Scholar

Troxel v. Granville, 530 US 57 (2000)Google Scholar

Uniform Law Commission. (n.d.). Parentage Act. www.uniformlaws.org/committees/community-home?CommunityKey=c4f37d2d-4d20-4be0-8256-22dd73af068fGoogle Scholar

Uniform Parentage Act § 9 (2017a)Google Scholar

Uniform Parentage Act § 102(3) (2017b)Google Scholar

Uniform Parentage Act § 502(b)(2) (2017c)Google Scholar

Uniform Parentage Act § 904 cmt (2017d)Google Scholar

Uniform Parentage Act § 905(b) (2017e)Google Scholar

US Donor Conceived Council. (2022). 2022 Survey of U.S. sperm banks. www.usdcc.org/2022/04/19/2022-survey-of-us-sperm-banks/Google Scholar

VARTA. (2021). 2021 Annual Report. www.varta.org.au/sites/default/files/2021-12/varta-annual-report-2021.pdfGoogle Scholar

Wash. Rev. Code § 26.26.750 (2017)Google Scholar

Wash. Rev. Code § 26.26A.815 (2019)Google Scholar

Wilson, R. F. (2003). Uncovering the rationale for requiring infertility in surrogacy arrangements. American Journal of Law & Medicine, 29(2–3), 337–362.Google Scholar

Zadeh, S., Ilioi, E.g., Jadva, V., & Golombok, S. (2018). The perspectives of adolescents conceived using surrogacy, egg or sperm donation, Human Reproduction, 33(6), 1099–1106, https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dey088Google Scholar

Achilles, R. (1993). Protection from what? The secret life of donor insemination. Politics and the Life Sciences, 12(2), 171–172. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0730938400023996Google Scholar

Allan, S. (2017), Donor Conception and the Search for Information from Secrecy and Anonymity to Openness. Routledge.Google Scholar

Ando, K. (1949). Funinshō ni taisuru Shindan oyobi Chiryō no Shinpo (Advances in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Infertility). Nihon Rinshō 7(4), 217–221.Google Scholar

Ando, K. (1960). Jinkō jusei no jissi jotai (The present performance of artificial insemination), in Koike, R., Tanaka, M., & Hitomi, Y. (Eds.), Jinkō jusei no shomondai: Sono Jittai to Hōteki Sokumen (pp. 9–24). Tokyo: Hōgaku Kenkyu-kai, Keio University.Google Scholar

Anonymous, (2003, December 25). Teikōseishi de tanjyō no gō josei rainichi, omoi kataru (Australian donor-conceived woman speaks her thoughts in Japan), Gifu Shimbun.Google Scholar

Anonymous, (2004, September 11). Seishi teikyōsha wo shiru kenri wo (We want the right to know sperm donors), Mainichi Shimbun.Google Scholar

Anonymous, (2014, April 27). Life Score 3: Jinsei no gakufu 3: Ranshi teikyō, susumanu hōseibi, “Ranshi” motomete kaigai he wataru joseitachi (Life Score 3: Egg donation, lack of progress in legislation, women going overseas to seek “eggs”), Nikkei West, www.sankei.com/west/news/140427/wst1404270075-n1.html (last accessed May 31, 2022).Google Scholar

Anonymous, (2020, December 7). Giron kaishi kara rippōka made 20nen. Seishoku hojoiryōhō seiritsu ha naze okuretaka (Why was the enactment of the Assisted Reproductive Technology Law delayed? Twenty years from the start of discussion to legislation), Mainichi Shimbun, https://mainichi.jp/articles/20201207/k00/00m/040/256000c (last accessed June 1, 2022).Google Scholar

Asahi Home & Welfare Weekly (Katei Asahi) (1949, September 10). Jinkōjusei mondai no hihan (Criticism of artificial insemination), 10.1–2.Google Scholar

Castro-Vàzquez, G. (2017). Intimacy and Reproductive in Contemporary Japan. Routledge.Google Scholar

Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. (2013). Informing offspring of their conception by gamete or embryo donation: a committee opinion. Fertility and Sterility, 100(1), 45–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.02.028CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fahey, R. (2022, January 13). A Tokyo-based mum is suing the sperm donor she had sex with to conceive her second child for fraud, Mirror Online, www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/woman-puts-baby-up-adoption-25938939 (last accessed June 1, 2022).Google Scholar

Hibino, Y. & Allan, S. (2020). Absence of laws regarding sperm and oocyte donation in Japan and the impacts on donors, parents, and the people born as a result. Reproductive Medicine and Biology, 19(3), 295–298. https://doi.org/10.1002/rmb2.12329Google Scholar

Higashi, K. (2017). Nihon ni okeru rezubian mazā (Lesbian mother in Japan). IGS Project Series No. 17 2016 nendo Seishoku iryō de keiseisareru tayōna kazoku to tōjisha no uerubi-ing wo kangaeru kenkyūkai houkokusho, Institute for Gender Studies, Ochanomizu University: 28–41. www2.igs.ocha.ac.jp/ips/ips-17/ (last accessed November 10, 2021).Google Scholar

Indekeu, A., Dierickx, K., Schotsmans, P., Daniels, K. R., Rober, P., & D’Hooghe, T. (2013). (2013) Factors contributing to parental decision-making in disclosing donor conception: a systematic review, Human Reproduction, 19(6), 714–733. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmt018Google Scholar

Kuji, N. et al. (2000). Teikyo seishi ni yori kodomowo eta nihonjin fufu no kokuchi ni taisuru iken ni kansuru kenkyū (Survey of attitudes of male infertile patients who have a child via DI). Japanese Journal of Fertility and Sterility 45(3): 219–225.Google Scholar

Kuji, N. et al. (2005). Wagakuni ni okeru seishi teikyōsha no ‘shutsuji wo shiru kenri’ ni taisuru ishiki chosa (Survey of sperm donors’ attitudes toward ‘the right to know of donor offspring’ in Japan). Health and Labor Sciences Research Grant: http://admin7.aiiku.or.jp/~doc/houkoku/h16/62795070.pdfGoogle Scholar

Kokado, M. (2015). A new phase in the regulation of assisted reproductive technology in Japan. Zeitschrift für Japanisches Recht, 20(40), 211–232.Google Scholar

Kusaka, K., Shimizu, K., & Nagaoki, S. (2006). Hi haigūshakan jinkōjusei de umareta hito no shinri (The identification of children born through AID). Language, Culture and Communication 37, 93–101.Google Scholar

Mainichi Shimbun Online (2020, December 5). Seishoku iryōho seiritsu: Mazu ippo ‘Kūhaku no 20 nen’ kurikaesanai tameni (Reproductive Medicine Act passed: First step to avoid repeating blank 20 years), https://mainichi.jp/articles/20201205/k00/00m/040/062000c (last accessed June 1, 2022).Google Scholar

Matsuo, Y. (2014, November 6). Dairi shussan, jinkō jusei, IVF… Seishokuiryō no giron kara nigeruna (Do not run away from the debate on reproductive medicine), Tokyo Express, http://tokyoexpress.info/2014/11/06/%e4%bb%a3%e7%90%86%e5%87%ba%e7%94%a3%e3%80%81%e4%ba%ba%e5%b7%a5%e6%8e%88%e7%b2%be%e3%80%81%e4%bd%93%e5%a4%96%e5%8f%97%e7%b2%be%e3%80%82%e7%94%9f%e6%ae%96%e5%8c%bb%e7%99%82%e3%81%ae%e8%ad%b0/ (last accessed November 10, 2021).Google Scholar

Miyazima, A. (2017). Seishokuiryō to datsu “shutuji” shakai (Assisted Reproductive Technology and an Escape from the Society of Respecting “Biological” Origin). Tokyo: Health System Kenkyusho.Google Scholar

Motomura, Y. (2003, November 24). “Chichi” sagasu jinkō juseiji no ko (DI Offspring is looking for “biological father”), Mainichi Shimbun.Google Scholar

Nagamizu, Y. (2021). Arubeki seishoku hojoiryō hōsei wo megutte kentō subeki kadai (In search of an appropriate policy on regulating assisted reproductive technologies and ascertaining the parentage of children born as a result of ART). Momoyama Gakuho, 35(21). www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/momoyamahougaku/35/0/35_1/_pdf (last accessed November 10, 2021).Google Scholar

Nezu, Y., & Sawami, R. (2009) Haha to musume no dairi shussan (Surrogacy between mother and daughter), Haru shobō.Google Scholar

Ninomiya, S. (2010). Kodomo no shiru kenri nitsuite (Donor children’s right to know). Gakujutsu no Dōkō, 15(5), 40–45.Google Scholar

Nomura, M. (2018, October 30). Daisansha teikyo no jinkō jusei chūshi: Keio byōin kokunaino hansū jisshi (Keio University Hospital which had been performing half of DI in Japan discontinue DI), Yomiuri Shimbun, Morning edition, p. 32.Google Scholar

Ono, T., Kaneko, S., & Tanabe, K. (2004) Shutsuji wo shiru kenri – Hitoku to Kaiji (Right to know – Confidentiality and disclosure). Sanfujinka no Sekai, 56(2), 113–119.Google Scholar

Osaki, T. (2020, December 27). “DM if interested”: Sperm donors in Japan operate in a gray zone, The Japan Times, www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/12/27/national/science-health/japan-sperm-donors/ (last accessed November 10, 2021).Google Scholar

Saimura, M. (2008). Kodomo no jinken shingai to sōsharu wāku (Human rights violation against donor children and social work). In Saimura, M. ed., Seishoku hojoiryō de umareta kodomo no shutsuji wo shiru kenri (Right to Know of Donor Children), 264–281 Tokyo: Fukumura Publisher.Google Scholar

Sakai, R., & Kasuga, M. (2004). Tsukurareu inochi (Creation of Life) Tokyo: NHK Book.Google Scholar

Semba, Y. et al. (2006). AID ni okeru “shutsuji wo shiru kenri: AID de umareta hitotachi ga motomeru teikyō jyōhō toha (The “right to know” in AID: Donor information sought by AID offspring). Seimei Rinri: Journal of Japan Association for Bioethics, 17(1), 147–153.Google Scholar

Semba, Y., Chang, C., Hong, H., Kamisato, A., Kokado, M., & Muto, K. (2010). Surrogacy: donor conception regulation in Japan. Bioethics, 24(7), 348–357. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8519.2009.01780.xGoogle Scholar

Shimizu, K., Kusaka, K. & Nagaoki, S. (2007) The experiences of women who decided to use DI (Japanese: Hi haigushakan) Journal of Japanese Society of Fertility Nursing, 4(1), 16–25.Google Scholar

Shimizu, K. (2020). Kokuchi ni taisuru oya no omoi – Oya no kai no jissen kara (Parents’ thoughts on telling truth – From the activities of parents’ groups). In Watashitachi ga taisetsu ni shitai mono: AID de kazoku ni natta hitotachi no kokuchi heno omoi to jissen kara (Parents’ thoughts on telling: through the activities of self-support group of parents. Story of Our Family). Tokyo: JSPS, 145–153.Google Scholar

Wakabayshi, M., & Horioka, C. Y. (2006). Is the eldest son different? The residential choice of siblings in Japan. NBER Working Paper Series. www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w12655/w12655.pdf (last accessed November 10, 2021).Google Scholar

Yamagata, N., Hoshi, K., Hirata, S., et al. (2003). Seishoku hojoiryō nitsuiteno ishiki chōsa 2003 Shūkei kekka (The survey of public attitudes towards donor conception 2003). www.mhlw.go.jp/wp/kenkyu/db/tokubetu02/index.html (last accessed November 10, 2021).Google Scholar

Yamamoto, N., Hirata, T., Izumi, G., Nakazawa, A., Fukuda, S., Neriishi, K., Arakawa, T., Masashi Takamura, M., Harada, M., Hirota, Y. Koga, K., Wada-Hiraike, O., Fujii, T., Irahara, M. & Osuga, Y. (2018). A survey of public attitudes towards third-party reproduction in Japan in 2014. PLOS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0198499Google Scholar

Yanaihara, T., & Yamagata, N. (1999). Survey on patient awareness of assisted reproductive technology: National survey (in Japanese, Seishoku hojoiryō ni taisuru kanja no ishiki ni kansuru kenkyū). Report on 1999 Children and Home Comprehensive Research Project (Grant-in-Aid from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS)) www.niph.go.jp/wadai/mhlw/1999/h1118028.pdf (last accessed November 10, 2021).Google Scholar

Yokota, A, & Watanabe, R. (2020, December 7). Giron kaishi kara rippōka made 20 nen: Seishoku Iryōhō ha naze okuretaka) (20 years from the start of discussions to legislation: Why did it take so long for Assisted Medicine Act to be passed?), Mainichi Shimbun Online, https://mainichi.jp/articles/20201207/k00/00m/040/256000c (last accessed June 1, 2022).Google Scholar

Yomiuri Shimbun Online (2021, April 16). SNS de seishi torihiki ga kyūzō: Funin fūfura riyō, kisei naku muhō jōtai (Sperm donation on SNS are increasing rapidly. Used by infertile couples, no legal regulations); www.yomiuri.co.jp/national/20210416-OYT1T50093/ (last accessed November 10, 2021).Google Scholar

Yui, H. (2011). Hi-haigushakan jinkō jusei niyotte shushō shitaka hito no raifu sutorī (A life story of a person conceived through artificial insemination by donor). Ritsumekan Ningen Kagaku Kenkyū, 24, 35–48.Google Scholar

Yui, H. (2012). Nihon hatsu no jinkō jusei seikōrei ni kansuru rekishiteki kentō: Ishi no gensetsu wo chūshin ni (A history study about first experience of successful artificial insemination in Japan: An analysis of doctors’ statements), Core Ethics, 8, 423–432.Google Scholar

Yui, H. (2015). Jinkō jusei no kindai (Modern History of Artificial Insemination), Tokyo: Seikyusha.Google Scholar

Yui, H. (2021). A history of Japanese follow-up surveys of children conceived through artificial insemination by donor: The evidence of “superior” children and positive eugenics. EASTS, 16, 50-69. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4498171/pdf/FVVinObGyn-7-137-143.pdfGoogle Scholar