124 S. Goedeke and K. Daniels
the donations took place prior to changes in South Australia requiring
identity disclosure, which may be a relevant factor in acceptance of, or
resistance to, the adoption metaphor. Indeed, the perceived similarity
of donation to closed adoption concerned participants in de Lacey’s
( 2005 ) study, and they reported that they would always be worrying
where the child was and about his or her well-being. It could be argued
that when ED can be positioned as a relational practice, as may be the
case in open arrangements, and not as one-off event in which social ties
between offspring and donors are broken, it becomes more feasible.
This appeared to be the case in our study, where both donors and
recipients resisted a donation metaphor. Instead, they drew com-
parisons between ED and adoption. Many referred to ED directly as
embryo adoption, or as ‘one step removed from adoption’. They con-
structed parallels with adoption as it is practised in New Zealand, where
the birth parent chooses the profile of adoptive parents, openness is
encouraged, and there is oversight by a government agency. Such prac-
tices underscored their perceptions of ED as adoption. This included
the practice of donors selecting recipients’ profiles, the openness and
disclosure encouraged, and the perceived oversight by a government-
appointed body (ECART). The counselling required, which involved
consideration of similar issues to those confronted by birth and adop-
tive parents, further reinforced the perceived similarity. As one counsel-
lor pointed out, the process in New Zealand tends to treat ED as akin
to adoption, which may then shape people’s perceptions.
However, rather than inhibiting donation, as has been suggested in
some studies (e.g. de Lacey 2007a), for donors in our study the adop-
tion metaphor provided a familiar and acceptable model for ED. This
may be because in the New Zealand legislative context of disclosure and
donor registration, ED is constructed as open adoption, which allows
the possibility of information about and contact with the donor-con-
ceived child. Indeed, Lovelock ( 2010 ) suggests that open adoption
practices have served as important antecedents for ED in New Zealand.
Donors in this study were clear that they would not have donated anon-
ymously. The parallels they drew with open adoption in New Zealand
made it more possible to donate embryos that would still be in some
way ‘their’ children.