Egg donation – and its compensation in particular – has been a touchy topic in the United Kingdom for as long as it’s been scientifically possible, but a decision made yesterday by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) is a major step in the right direction.

Now, egg donors will be compensated a fixed fee of 750 pounds (approximately $1200) for loss of earnings, expenses, and to “recognize their gift,” according to an article published in The Telegraph. In recent years UK egg donors could be reimbursed up to 250 pounds for expenses, but the shortage of donors in comparison to the demand drove intended parents abroad, eventually forcing authorities to reconsider their stance on compensation. Historically, many egg donors in the UK haven’t received any compensation at all, as this is how authorities deemed egg donation would remain an “altruistic” act.

While we believe all donors participate, ultimately, for altruistic reasons, the fact is that the process is far from easy. It is time intensive and a huge commitment, both physically and emotionally. Women want to help, but shouldn’t be expected to take major financial blows for transportation, childcare, loss of wages, and other expenses involved. Here in the United States, donors are compensated for their time and effort – not for the eggs themselves. With the help of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, reputable agencies like ConceiveAbilities follow strict guidelines regarding compensation.

The new compensation model in the UK is actually based on systems currently used in Denmark and Spain, and includes new rules for sperm donors as well. They also left an agreement that egg sharing – where donors can receive their own fertility treatment for free or at a lesser cost in return for their donation – would remain unchanged.

The HFEA will likely revisit the topic in the future. Policy officer Danielle Hamm, who assisted in the decision, admitted, “This is not an exact science, it’s a judgment.”

What do you think? Is the new law enough to boost egg donation in the UK, or will donors and intended parents alike continue to look abroad in order to participate in the process? You can read more about this developing story here.

It goes without saying that certain aspects of assisted reproduction can be a bit tricky, but one – the issue of donor anonymity – has moved to the forefront of our industry discussion recently. A recent NPR blog broached this complicated topic through the eyes of several donor-conceived women and their efforts to find the identity of the men who donated the sperm that help create them. These women are not the only ones taking this path. We’ve seen a notable increase in the number of participants, on both sides of this relationship, who are interested in (or at least open to) future contact. In fact, some donors are even willing to meet with their recipient during the cycle.

I think it might be surprising to some that most donor-conceived children search for their donors mainly for the biological link. They report the three main reasons as curiosity about donor characteristics, medical reasons, and just wanting the experience of meeting the donor. In fact, one of the women highlighted in this NPR story noted that in addition to a sense of loss, she felt there was an obvious irony to this situation: “Couples use donor sperm or egg because they very much want at least some biological connection to their child.” And yet, she says, “by using anonymous donors they cut off that child’s other links.”

As more and more donor-conceived adult children seek out their donors, it’s imperative that donors and recipients work with reputable agencies who not only educate all parties about anonymity and how laws can and likely will change in the future, but to help navigate the complexities of this issue in a way that respects and protects everyone involved.

Obviously, this issue is still working itself out. I’m interested in what you think about it, so please share your thoughts.

-Nazca

For decades, anonymity has been the hallmark of egg and sperm donation. Like most agencies, we take great care to protect the identities of our donors and recipients and establish a direct agreement between parties to ensure the desired degree of privacy of all parties involved. A new law in Washington, though, makes it the first state to change the “rules.” It will now guarantee that children who are conceived with the help of egg donation agencies and sperm banks in Washington have access to their donors’ full name and medical history. Unless the donor specifically opts out of this agreement to be identified, the information will be available to the child when he or she turns 18.

It’s a controversial concept, particularly considering what the standard has been for so many years. Unlike adoption, where open relationships have become quite common, the act of “donating” is often viewed as something that is done anonymously – like blood and organ donations. But in a Time.com article last week, law professor Julie Shapiro notes that “there is an emerging sense that it’s a problem for children and it’s a problem for donors. They have regrets.”

We are finding that more and more intended parents want to provide this option for their future child. It’s not so much about identity now, but rather to answer questions about their genetic origins later. And donors tend to respond in kind. While they’re not necessarily looking to share personal information, they may be able to see it from the recipients’ perspective and agree to be identified in the future. The law in Washington is clarifying something that is already happening in many legal documents around the country – the donor must confirm that she is open to the potential of future contact, should the child desire it.

In the field of third party reproduction, laws are constantly evolving. Donor anonymity will continue to be a delicate aspect of the legal process, and none of us – states included – should be the final judge of what is right for each donor match.

Read more about the new law and its implications at Time.com.