1. See NVOG Modelprotocol, supra note 45, at 2. Importantly, it is highly unlikely that a same standard would be endorsed if a compulsory contraception measure ever would become reality because the higher standard used in the context of ARTs is considered justified due to the responsibility of the physician towards the child that would result from the treatment.
2. See id. para. 4.13, 4.16. As a result of this, Dutch legal doctrine does not allow a child to bring a wrongful life claim against the parents. After all, Kelly's interest in non-existence depends on her mother intention to abort her if she had all the information. Without the mother's intention to abort Kelly, Kelly would not have an interest in her own existence.
3. Glenn Cohen has pointed out that in different legislation in which the future child's existence is prevented, it is justified with an appeal to the future child's interests. He also points out the problematic nature of this appeal, as it cannot be said that the future child in all these cases actually has an interest in its own non-existence. See generally Cohen, supra note 55.