生殖醫(yī)生因使用自己的精子治療患者而被起訴
游海 2022-5-9 11:32 試管之家 查看: 220 評(píng)論: 0
摘要: 生殖醫(yī)生因使用自己的精子治療患者而被起訴 Fertility doctor sued for using own sperm in treating patients 一名加利福尼亞婦女正在起訴她的生育醫(yī)生,因?yàn)樗谥委熤惺褂昧俗约旱木?。 凱瑟琳理查 ...
生殖醫(yī)生因使用自己的精子治療患者而被起訴 Fertility doctor sued for using own sperm in treating patients 一名加利福尼亞婦女正在起訴她的生育醫(yī)生,因?yàn)樗谥委熤惺褂昧俗约旱木印?/div> 凱瑟琳理查茲指責(zé)邁克爾基肯博士在四十年前使用自己的精子而不是匿名捐贈(zèng)者的精子懷孕了她的兩個(gè)孩子后進(jìn)行了“醫(yī)療強(qiáng)奸”。該案件是近年來所謂的“生育欺詐”案件之一,隨著23andMe和Ancestry等廣泛可用的基因檢測服務(wù)的出現(xiàn)而暴露無遺。 “他偷偷使用了自己的精子,”理查茲告訴福克斯新聞。“現(xiàn)在我必須知道他侵犯了我,我深愛的孩子是他惡心行為的結(jié)果?!?/div> 在理查茲的女兒朱莉·德魯約爾(Julie Druyor)使用23andMe測試顯示她是50%的德系猶太人后,Kiken博士被揭露為生父——這與理查茲或所謂的精子捐贈(zèng)者不同。在1978年和1981年接受治療時(shí),理查茲只同意一位符合特定要求的精子捐獻(xiàn)者,包括捐獻(xiàn)者必須是基督徒。 一位系譜學(xué)家將Kiken博士確定為捐贈(zèng)者,并發(fā)現(xiàn)Druyor有一個(gè)同父異母的兄弟,其母親也是Kiken博士的患者。 此外,測試顯示Druyor是遺傳性疾病Tay-Sachs病的攜帶者,這種疾病在猶太裔人群中更為常見。這種疾病會(huì)導(dǎo)致癲癇發(fā)作、精神和感覺障礙以及過早死亡,但前提是它是從父母雙方遺傳的。只有一份副本的運(yùn)營商不受影響。 “現(xiàn)在我必須面對我已經(jīng)將他的基因遺傳下來的事實(shí),”德魯約爾說?!拔視?huì)在我的孩子身上看到他嗎?我討厭我什至不得不考慮這一點(diǎn)。 還有其他多起醫(yī)生在未經(jīng)患者同意的情況下使用自己的精子為患者授精的案例。值得注意的是,2019年的DNA測試證實(shí),荷蘭的Jan Karbaat博士在1980年*為他的患者中的至少49個(gè)孩子生了父親。在美國,唐納德·克萊恩博士承認(rèn)讓多名患者受孕,導(dǎo)致至少60名兒童受孕。此案促使美國印第安納州通過了第一個(gè)生育欺詐法案(參見BioNews 998)。 然而,有明確法律禁止此類行為的國家仍然是少數(shù)。此外,雖然一些州將未經(jīng)同意使用供體配子標(biāo)記為欺詐,但只有德克薩斯州將其歸類為性侵犯。為了應(yīng)對類似訴訟的激增,制定立法的州的數(shù)量正在增加。 加州圣地亞哥大學(xué)生物倫理學(xué)和法律專家Dov Fox教授評(píng)論說,這些案例“嚴(yán)重違反了知情同意”。他告訴水星新聞:“我們不知道[生育欺詐]有多普遍。但越來越清楚的是,這不是一種失常。 原文: A Californian woman is suing her fertility doctor for using his own sperm in her treatment. Katherine Richards has accused Dr Michael Kiken of'medical rape'after he used his own sperm,rather than that of an anonymous donor,to conceive her two children forty years ago.The case is one of a number in recent years of so-called'fertility fraud',exposed by the advent of widely available genetic testing services such as 23andMe and Ancestry. 'He secretly used his own sperm,'Richards told FOX News.'Now I have to know that he violated me and that my children,who I love dearly,are the result of his disgusting conduct.' Dr Kiken was revealed as the biological father after Richards'daughter,Julie Druyor,used a 23andMe test which revealed she was 50 percent Ashkenazi Jewish-unlike either Richards or the supposed sperm donor.When undergoing treatment in 1978 and 1981,Richards had consented only to a sperm donor who met specific requirements,including that the donor be Christian. A genealogist identified Dr Kiken as the donor and found that Druyor has a half-brother whose mother was also a patient of Dr Kiken. In addition,the test revealed Druyor is a carrier for the genetic disorder Tay-Sachs disease,which is more common in people of Jewish heritage.The disorder can cause seizures,mental and sensory disabilities,and premature death,but only if it is inherited from both parents.Carriers who have only one copy are unaffected. 'Now I have to deal with the fact that I've passed down his genes,'said Druyor.'Am I going to see him in my children?I hate that I even have to think about that.' There have been multiple other cases of doctors using their own sperm to inseminate patients without their consent.Notably,in 2019 DNA testing confirmed that Dr Jan Karbaat in the Netherlands fathered at least 49 of his patients'children in the 1980s.In the US Dr Donald Cline admitted impregnating multiple patients,which resulted in at least 60 children.The case prompted the passing of the first fertility fraud bill in the US,in the state of Indiana(see BioNews 998). However,states with explicit laws against such conduct are still the minority.Further still,while some states label unconsented use of donor gametes as fraud,only Texas classes it as sexual assault.The number of states with legislation is rising,in response to a surge of similar lawsuits. Professor Dov Fox,a specialist in bioethics and law from the University of San Diego,California,commented that these cases exhibit'a profound violation of informed consent.'He told Mercury News:'We don't know how common it[fertility fraud]is.But it is becoming clear that it's not an aberration.' |