of a thing purchase reward to a person for donating e.g. remuneration that is reward calculated as a wage recompense of a person for losses incurred. This can involve both reimbursement for financial losses and compensation for non-financial losses such as discomfort. Our proposed approach is intended to fall under the third category of recompense, recognising that donation involves both financial and non-financial losses. An increase in the level of expenses should be at a rate that does not leave donors in a significantly better position than they would have been in without donating. Justice Egg donation is intrusive and carries risks for donors. A comment by a submitter who had used donated eggs from both overseas and local sources captured the perspectives of many submitters: egg donor goes through so much physically to do a donor cycle the “An – hormone ups and downs, the injections, the invasive procedures, anaesthetics, etc, etc.” Another consumer noted the significant amount she had spent in her successful efforts to advertise for egg donors in New Zealand, arguing that she would rather have spent the money compensating a donor. Supply While increased compensation to donors may contribute to increasing the supply of donated gametes in New Zealand, we cannot quantify how many more donors would be likely to come forward. As noted by some submitters, the level of donation would not fall. However, an increased supply of donated eggs may in turn increase interest in using donated eggs in this country, whether or not consumers would have looked overseas for donated eggs. Decisions about who pays An increased level of available donor expenses would require decisions about who would bear the costs. Where procedures are publicly funded, expenses paid to donors might decrease the number of people able to be treated from the pool of available funding. Where procedures are privately funded, providers might pass on to intending parents the additional costs associated with a higher rate of expenses.
purchase of a thing reward to a person for donating e.g. remuneration that is reward calculated as a wage recompense of a person for losses incurred. This can involve both reimbursement for financial losses and compensation for non-financial losses such as discomfort. Our proposed approach is intended to fall under the third category of recompense, recognising that donation involves both financial and non-financial losses. An increase in the level of expenses should be at a rate that does not leave donors in a significantly better position than they would have been in without donating. Justice Egg donation is intrusive and carries risks for donors. A comment by a submitter who had used donated eggs from both overseas and local sources captured the perspectives of many submitters: “An egg donor goes through so much physically to do a donor cycle – the hormone ups and downs, the injections, the invasive procedures, anaesthetics, etc, etc.” Another consumer noted the significant amount she had spent in her successful efforts to advertise for egg donors in New Zealand, arguing that she would rather have spent the money compensating a donor. Supply While increased compensation to donors may contribute to increasing the supply of donated gametes in New Zealand, we cannot quantify how many more donors would be likely to come forward. As noted by some submitters, the level of donation would not fall. However, an increased supply of donated eggs may in turn increase interest in using donated eggs in this country, whether or not consumers would have looked overseas for donated eggs. Decisions about who pays An increased level of available donor expenses would require decisions about who would bear the costs. Where procedures are publicly funded, expenses paid to donors might decrease the number of people able to be treated from the pool of available funding. Where procedures are privately funded, providers might pass on to intending parents the additional costs associated with a higher rate of expenses.
acart-import-export-gametes-embryos-proposed-advice-to-minister-of-health-v2.docx