For sure there is more to be said for and against the transfer principle, but assumable that enough has been said here to make it – or something analogous – plausible. What does the transfer principle have for the morality of gamete donation? Could it be reasonable for gamete donors to think that the recipients of their gametes will meet their parental responsibilities adequately?
It is tricky to give a definitive answer to this question, for that will depend on the structure of the gamete transfer system in question.
Start with distinguishing two systems of gamete donation, donor-directed systems and anonymous systems.
In the donor-directed system the gamete donor is able to select those individuals who have permission to use her or his gametes. The only forms of gamete donation that are donor directed are those that occur between friends and relatives. It is not easy to find out whether such gamete donors reflect on the suitability of the gamete recipients for parenthood, but one suspects that most gametes donors give the matter at least some thought. Definitely one assumes that most individuals would be reluctant to donate gametes to someone who they had reason to think would not fulfill their parental responsibilities adequately.
The majority of gamete donors use anonymous donation. The donor is anonymous to the recipients, but that the recipients are anonymous to the donor, and the donor has no say in who has permission to use their gametes. Donation by anonymous complicates the question of parental responsibilities, for if donors have little control over the use of their gametes then it is less clear that they are culpable if their gametes are used to produce children that are maltreated. Certainly, it is claimed that a responsible donor would only assent to contribute to such a system if they had good reason to think that the administrators of that system had reasonable screening procedures in place for prospective parents. This is a fair point; it is also a point that exonerates many – and perhaps most – gamete donors, for gamete donors have two fairly good reasons for thinking that their gametes will be used only by responsible parents.
- Gamete recipients invariably want to be parents, and there is reason to think that those who want to be parents tend, in the whole, to do a good job of being parents. (It seems reasonable to think that those who want to be parents will generally do a better job of being parents than those who become parents out of necessity, at least.)
- Gamete donors have reason to assume that fertility services providers screen prospective parents, in much the way that adoption agencies screen prospective parents.
- Fertility centers should take the child’s welfare into consideration in deciding whether or not to provide donated gametes to prospective parents.
By giving legislation, it seems reasonable for gamete donors to assume that their gametes would be unlikely to go to unsuitable individuals.
No matter what the failings of gamete donors, it seems clear that the practice of gamete donation provides substantial benefits.
Gamete donors benefit those who become parents through their assistance, and who would otherwise be either unwilling or unable to become parents without their assistance. More contentiously, gamete donors may benefit those who are brought into existence through the actions of gamete donors. Even if gamete donors fail to live up to their parental responsibilities, a full assessment of gamete donation must balance these alleged failings against the benefits that the practice involves.
| 
