Reconsidering the number of offspring per gamete donor in the Dutch open-identity system

Sperm Donors' Identity Disclosure: Is It REALLY Crucial? For Whom?

OBJECTIVE

To study the preference of sperm donors with identity disclosure (ID) versus anonymous donors (AD) and to understand if this selection affects clinical outcomes in an Israeli population.

METHODS

This retrospective study included patients who chose imported sperm donation during 2017-2021. Of these, 526 used their own (autologous) oocytes and 43 patients used donated oocytes (DO). The primary endpoint was the type of chosen donor with ID versus AD. We examined the tendency toward ID according to demographic parameters and the theoretical impact of donor-type selection on reproductive outcome and compared patients who performed cycles with autologous oocytes with those using DO.

RESULTS

Single women had a significantly higher probability of choosing sperm donors with ID than heterosexual couples (55.6% vs. 33.3%, OR 2.5, CI 95% 1.52-4.11, P < 0.001). Although not significant, same-sex couples were more likely to choose sperm donors with ID than heterosexual couples (49.1% vs. 33.3%, OR 1.93, CI 95% 0.97-3.85, P = 0.06). Sperm donor samples, 2501 vials, were imported. It was performed 698 intra-uterine insemination and 812 in vitro fertilization cycles were performed, respectively, resulting in 283 pregnancies without differences between patients who chose sperm donors with ID versus AD sperm. No significant differences were observed regarding the option for sperm donors with ID between patients using DO (44.2%) and those using autologous oocytes (51.3%).

CONCLUSION

While ID is important for a certain section (mainly single) of recipients, it is far from the only dominant factor during donor selection. Sperm donation type does not impact clinical outcomes.

An analysis of the outcome of 11 712 men applying to be sperm donors in Denmark and the USA

STUDY QUESTION

Is the outcome of donor recruitment influenced by the country in which recruitment took place or the initial identity (ID)-release choice of applicants?

SUMMARY ANSWER

More applicants are accepted as donors in Denmark than in the USA and those who choose ID release are more frequently accepted than those who do not.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

The successful recruitment of sperm donors is essential to provide a range of medically assisted reproduction (MAR) procedures, which rely upon donor sperm. However, while much has been written about the medical screening and assessment of sperm donors from a safety perspective, relatively little has been written about the process of recruiting donors and how it works in practice. There are differences in demographic characteristics between donors who choose to allow their identity to be released to their donor offspring (ID release) compared to those who do not (non-ID release). These characteristics may also influence the likelihood of them being recruited.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

A total of 11 712 men applied to be sperm donors at a sperm bank in Denmark and the USA during 2018 and 2019.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Anonymized records of all donor applicants were examined to assess the number passing through (or lost) at each stage of the recruitment process. Statistical analysis was carried out to examine differences between location (Denmark or USA) and/or donor type (ID release versus non-ID release).

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Few applicants (3.79%) were accepted as donors and had samples frozen and released for use; this was higher in Denmark (6.53%) than in the USA (1.03%) (χ2 = 243.2; 1 degree of freedom (df); z = 15.60; P < 0.0001) and was higher in donors who opted at the outset to be ID release (4.70%) compared to those who did not (3.15%) (χ2 = 18.51; 1 df; z = 4.303; P < 0.0001). Most candidate donors were lost during recruitment because they: withdrew, failed to respond, did not attend an appointment, or did not return a questionnaire (54.91%); reported a disqualifying health issue or failed a screening test (17.41%); did not meet the eligibility criteria at the outset (11.71%); or did not have >5 × 106 motile sperm/ml in their post-thaw samples (11.20%). At each stage, there were statistically significant differences between countries and the donor's initial ID choice. During recruitment, some donors decided to change ID type. There were no country differences in the frequency in which this occurred (χ2 = 0.2852; 1 df; z = 0.5340; P = 0.5933), but it was more common for donors to change from non-ID release to ID release (27.19%) than the other way around (11.45%) (χ2 = 17.75; 1 df; z = 4.213; P < 0.0001), although movements in both directions did occur in both countries.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

No information was available about the demographic characteristics of the applicants, which may also have influenced their chances of being accepted as a donor (e.g. ethnicity and age). Donor recruitment procedures may differ in other locations according to local laws or guidelines.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

A better understanding of when and why candidate donors are lost in the recruitment process may help develop leaner and more efficient pathways for interested donors and sperm banks. This could ultimately increase the number of donors recruited (through enhanced information, support, and reassurance during the recruitment process) or it may reduce the financial cost to the recipients of donor sperm, thus making it more affordable to those who are ineligible for state-funded treatment.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

The study received no funding from external sources. All authors are Cryos employees or members of the Cryos External Scientific Advisory Committee.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

Meeting multiple same-donor offspring: psychosocial challenges

Debates regarding donor-conceived people's rights to genetic information have caused some jurisdictions to abolish donor anonymity. Moreover, voluntary services have been established whose primary focus is providing possibilities to find information about the donor. A less discussed consequence is that donor-conceived people also find information about donor half-siblings: people conceived through the same donor. In the recent climate of openness and online DNA tests, there is an increased chance of finding multiple donor half-siblings. This study explored how donor-conceived people experience meeting multiple same-donor offspring in a group setting. Second, the study investigated donor-conceived people's need for support when meeting multiple donor half-siblings. A qualitative approach was used. Nineteen donor-conceived offspring who participated in donor half-sibling network meetings were interviewed. Using a grounded theory approach three themes were identified regarding group aspects: (i) defining group membership; (ii) regulating closeness and distance; and (iii) managing group dynamics. Professional support needs in relation to these themes were also analysed. While establishing relationships between donor half-siblings are viewed as generally more beneficial than connecting with a donor, this study showed that these new relationships also come with their challenges, and counselling may need to be refined towards a more specific same donor-offspring relationships' framework.

Maximum number of children per sperm donor based on false paternity rate

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to estimate the weight of each relevant factor in such unions of inadvertent consanguinity and to determine a "reasonable" limit for the number of children per donor, matching the probability of inadvertent consanguinity arising from the use of sperm donor in assisted reproduction with that of such a union arising from false paternity.

METHODS

In this study, we applied to Spanish data a mathematical model of consanguineous unions, taking into account the following factors: maximum number of live births/donor, fertility rate, average number of births per donor in a pregnancy, donor success rate, matings per phenotype, number of newborns/year, and number of donors needed in the population/year and births by false paternity.

RESULTS

In Spain, the number of inadvertent unions between descendants of the same donor in Spain has been estimated at 0.4/year (one every two and a half years), although this frequency decreases as the reference population increases. On the other hand, the frequency of unions between family members due to false paternity has been estimated at 6.1/year. Thus, only 6% of such unions are due to the use of donor sperm.

CONCLUSION

A total of 25 children per sperm donor are needed to align the probability of inadvertant consanguinity arising from the use of assisted reproduction with that due to false paternity. Therefore, we consider this number to be the maximum "reasonable" number of children born per donor in Spain.

Donor Conception Disclosure: Directive or Non-Directive Counselling?

It is widely agreed among health professionals that couples using donor insemination should be offered counselling on the topic of donor conception disclosure. However, it is clear from the literature that there has long been a lack of agreement about which counselling approach should be used in this case: a directive or a non-directive approach. In this paper we investigate which approach is ethically justifiable by balancing the two underlying principles of autonomy (non-directive approach) and beneficence (directive approach). To overrule one principle in favour of another, six conditions should be fulfilled. We analyse the arguments in favour of the beneficence principle, and consequently, a directive approach. This analysis shows that two conditions are not met; the principle of autonomy should not be overridden. Therefore, at this moment, a directive counselling approach on donor conception disclosure cannot be ethically justified.

Gamete donation, information sharing and the best interests of the child: an overview of the psychosocial evidence

This paper overviews key empirical findings from social science research regarding the impact of gamete donation on child wellbeing. In particular, the paper addresses current regulatory debates concerning information sharing and the best interests of the child by considering psychosocial aspects of telling--or not telling--children about their donor conception and the identity of their donor. The paper identifies three core sets of empirical, ethical and policy concerns underpinning these debates relating to (i) the psychosocial impact of gamete donation per se on child wellbeing, (ii) the psychosocial impact of parental disclosure decisions on child wellbeing, and (iii) the psychosocial implications of donor identification for donor-conceived offspring. The paper illustrates how these concerns are framed by ideas about the significance-or not-of 'genetic relatedness'; ideas which have come to the fore in contemporary discussions about the potential consequences of donor-conceived individuals gaining access to their donor's identity. By drawing together research findings that may be pertinent to the regulation of gamete donation and information sharing, a further aim of this paper is to explore the potential use and misuse of empirical 'evidence' in ethical and policy debates. Whilst this paper starts from the premise that psychosocial data has a vital role in grounding normative discussions, it seeks to contribute to this dialogue by highlighting both the value and limitations of social science research. In particular, the paper argues for a cautious approach to applying psychosocial evidence to ethical issues that is sensitive to the caveats and nuances of research findings and the changing cultural and regulatory context.

Evolving minimum standards in responsible international sperm donor offspring quota

An international working group was established with the aim of making recommendations on the number of offspring for a sperm donor that should be allowable in cases of international use of his sperm. Considerations from genetic, psychosocial, operational and ethical points of view were debated. For these considerations, it was assumed that current developments in genetic testing and Internet possibilities mean that, now, all donors are potentially identifiable by their offspring, so no distinction was made between anonymous and non-anonymous donation. Genetic considerations did not lead to restrictive limits (indicating that up to 200 offspring or more per donor may be acceptable except in isolated social-minority situations). Psychosocial considerations on the other hand led to proposals of rather restrictive limits (10 families per donor or less). Operational and ethical considerations did not lead to more or less concrete limits per donor, but seemed to lie in-between those resulting from the aforementioned ways of viewing the issue. In the end, no unifying agreed figure could be reached; however the consensus was that the number should never exceed 100 families. The conclusions of the group are summarized in three recommendations.

Genetic testing of sperm donors for cystic fibrosis and spinal muscular atrophy: evaluation of clinical utility

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical utility of genetic testing for cystic fibrosis (CF) and spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) in sperm donors.

STUDY DESIGN

We studied the results of the genetic tests for CF and SMA applied to 372 sperm donor candidates. The CF carrier screening test analysed 32 mutations on the CFTR gene. Regarding SMA, the carrier test studied possible deletions of SMN1/2 by Multiplex Ligation-dependent Probe Amplification (MLPA) methodology.

RESULTS

The carrier frequency obtained was greater for SMA than for CF. After adjusting the results obtained for the sensitivity of the tests, and taking into account the prevalence of female carriers in our population, the probability of transmission of the disease to the child from a donor with a negative genetic test was about five times lower in the case of SMA than in CF, although this difference was not statistically significant. The number of donors needed to screen (NNS) to avoid the occurrence of a child being affected by CF and SMA in our population was similar in both cases (1591 vs. 1536).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates the need to include SMA among the diseases for which genetic screening is performed in the process of sperm donor selection. We believe that testing donors for SMA is as important and as useful as doing so for CF.