Legal age limits in accessing donor information: experiences of donor-conceived people, parents, sperm donors and counsellors

RESEARCH QUESTION

What are the lived experiences of donor-conceived people, parents, sperm donors and counsellors related to legal age limits on accessing donor information in the Netherlands?

DESIGN

A phenomenological study was carried out that included 20 donor-conceived individuals, 15 parents, 6 sperm donors and 5 counsellors. Data were collected through online qualitative in-depth interviews and focus groups. The data were analysed using Dahlberg's Reflective Lifeworld Approach.

RESULTS

The results show how: (i) age limits create challenges related to dependency, autonomy and loyalty to parents; (ii) donor information can be important for identity development, which looks different at different ages; (iii) inaccessible information can lead to unfair loss and may be perceived as negative; (iv) relational stability provides a good foundation for dealing with the (in)accessibility of donor information; (v) procedural barriers and age limits increase the inaccessibility of donor information; and (vi) comprehensive counselling is desired for donor-conceived individuals, parents and donors.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that legal age limits on accessing donor information can lead to several negative consequences. The age limits focus on one individual, which is not appropriate for questions about ancestry that always pertain to a relational network. Counselling should be tailored to the child's needs, and the child's family should be involved. Furthermore, the donor should receive independent counselling.

Searching for and making genetic connections: recommendations for practice from donor conceived adults in the UK

RESEARCH QUESTION

What are the support needs of donor conceived individuals who are searching for or open to matching with genetic connections?

DESIGN

A total of 88 donor conceived adults in the UK participated in an online survey open between January and August 2022. Participants were asked about their level of awareness of current resource provision, recommendations for resources to support the process of searching for genetic connections, and recommendations for resources to support with feelings about searching for or being found by genetic connections.

RESULTS

Participants were found to have varying levels of awareness of the resources available to them, with 39% describing themselves as aware, 41% as partly aware and 20% as unaware. Their recommendations for practical and emotional resources also varied. The most recommended resources for practical support were DNA testing and changes to UK law. The most recommended resources for emotional support were counselling and peer and other support groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The impact of legal and technological changes such as direct-to-consumer DNA testing and the legal transition to identifiable donation may be felt by donor conceived individuals irrespective of their year of birth. The wishes of donor conceived individuals for different support resources should be borne in mind by practitioners, regulatory bodies, and policy makers going forward.

Why it is important that we understand the information that gamete donors provide about themselves to recipients

A personal description and goodwill message is often the only form of communication a gamete recipient receives from the donor. However, the nature of the information gamete donors leave for recipients is not well understood. This Viewpoint article discusses a recent study published in this journal that makes a significant contribution to our understanding of this area of research and raises important questions for research going forward.

The motives and experiences of donor-conceived persons requesting the identity of their sperm donors

RESEARCH QUESTION

What are the motives and experiences of donor-conceived persons (DCP) who search for and receive information about their identity-release sperm donor?

DESIGN

A qualitative interview study with 29 individuals (21 women, seven men, one non-binary) who were consecutively recruited after having requested information about their sperm donor at five Swedish University hospitals. All participants were conceived after donor insemination to heterosexual couples within an identity-release donation programme. Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted face-to-face or via telephone between September 2016 and November 2019, and transcribed audio recordings were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

The motives and experiences of DCP were described in two themes. The theme 'donor information can fill different needs' describes that varying motives, thoughts and feelings are related to searching for and obtaining donor information. Motives ranged from curiosity and a desire for agency over one's conception to hopes of finding a new father. The theme 'navigating donor information in a relational context' describes the process of obtaining donor information as interpersonal, highlighting that the DCP needs to balance the interests of different stakeholders, and that obtaining donor information can challenge the relationship quality with the father.

CONCLUSIONS

Obtaining the donor's identity has the potential to affect the understanding of DCP of themselves, and to influence relationships within their family in unexpected and challenging ways. Therefore, adequate resources should be allocated to support the growing number of families after identity-release donation.

'Once you open that Pandora's box, you cannot close it': a qualitative study on family relationships following insemination fraud

RESEARCH QUESTION

Insemination fraud occurs when the spermatozoa intended for insemination have been intentionally swapped for another person's without the knowledge of the intended family. In what ways is this experienced by recipient parents and their offspring?

DESIGN

This was a qualitative study involving semi-structured interviews with 15 participants (seven parents and eight donor-conceived individuals) affected by insemination fraud involving the same doctor in Canada.

RESULTS

This study documents how insemination fraud is experienced by recipient parents and (their) offspring at the personal and relational levels. At the personal level, insemination fraud can induce a sense of agency loss for the recipient parents and a (temporary) sense of identity realignment for the offspring. At the relational level, it can lead to a reshuffling of genetic ties through the new genetic mapping it involves. This reshuffling can, in turn, disrupt kinship ties, leaving a deep imprint that some families struggle to overcome. Experiences differ depending on whether or not the progenitor is known, and when he is known, on whether it is another donor or the doctor himself.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the significant challenges that insemination fraud poses to the families who experience it, it is important that this practice be subjected to the medical, legal and social scrutiny it deserves.

The Child's Right to Know Versus the Parents' Right Not to Tell: The Attitudes of Couples Undergoing Fertility Treatments Towards Identity-Release Gamete Donation

Background

In Brazil, donor anonymity is mandatory; however, the tendency of Brazilians towards the practice is unknown. In this study, an attempt was made to investigate whether couples undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART) have a different perception of anonymous versus identity-release gamete donation than a target population in Brazil.

Methods

This cross-sectional study was performed from September 1, 2020 to December 15, 2020. For that purpose, surveys through online platforms were conducted, including either patients undergoing ART (ART-group, n=400) or subjects interested in the theme (interested-group, n=100) randomized by age at a 1:4 ratio. The survey collected information on the participants' attitudes towards anonymity of gamete donors, and answers were compared between the groups.

Results

Most participants stated that the relationship between children and their parents would be affected by the child's knowledge of the origin of its conception. Most participants in the ART-group believed that the gamete donor's identity should not be revealed to the child, while only half of the interested-group stated the same. Most of the participants stated that "the donor's identity should be revealed if the child questions its biological origin". "From birth" was the second most common response, while "when the child turns 18 years old" and "sometime during teenage years" were less common answers.

Conclusion

The attitudes of ART patients about anonymity are conservative, with most participants believing that family relationships may be affected if the child is aware of the origin of his/her conception. These patients also believe that the identity of the gamete donor should not be revealed to the child.

Make our wellbeing a priority: donor-conceived adults call for ongoing support and conversation about their donor conception

The experiences of donor-conceived adults have received relatively little research attention despite the increasing trend of gamete conception. In this qualitative study, ten donor-conceived adults: eight women and two men, were interviewed to explore their experience of being donor-conceived. The participants did not automatically have the right to access identifying information of their donors upon turning eighteen as they were born prior to the introduction of the 2004 Human Assisted Reproductive Technology (HART) Act in New Zealand. The overarching theme identified was a need for parents, donors, and the fertility industry to prioritise their longer-term wellbeing. To this effect, participants wanted recognition of the importance of their donor conception history for their identity, and called for early disclosure to be reinforced through open, ongoing conversations with their parents. They highlighted the need for support to process the implications of donor conception, and to search for and link with their donors. Study findings underscore the value of legislation and practices which enable disclosure in the context of ongoing openness and provide access to support for donor-conceived individuals.

Sperm donor attitudes and experiences with direct-to-consumer genetic testing

Objective

To identify factors influencing sperm donor willingness to participate in direct-to-consumer genetic testing, comfort with sharing genetically identifiable data in commercial genetic testing databases, and likelihood to donate sperm again.

Design

Cross-sectional online anonymous survey.

Setting

Multicenter, 2 large American sperm banks from July 1, 2020 to July10, 2021.

Patients

Sperm donors from 1980 to 2020.

Interventions

None.

Main outcome measures

Associations between donor demographic characteristics, donation history, and attitudes toward direct-to-consumer genetic testing.

Results

A total of 396 donors completed the survey. Most donations (61.5%) occurred from 2010 to 2020, and 34.3% were nonidentified donations. Nonidentified donors were less comfortable with their genetic data being shared than open-identity donors (25.4% vs. 43.8%) and were less likely than open-identity donors to donate sperm again (43.3% vs. 72.1%). Donors who donated after the inception of direct-to-consumer genetic testing in 2007 were less likely to participate in commercial genetic testing than those who donated before 2007 (25.8% vs. 37.1%). Most donors (87.4%) have disclosed their donation(s) to current partners, but fewer have disclosed them to their families (56.6%) or children (30.5%). Of the donors who had been contacted by donor-conceived persons, 79.5% were identified via direct-to-consumer genetic testing. Overall, 61.1% of donors would donate again regardless of direct-to-consumer genetic testing.

Conclusions

Direct-to-consumer genetic testing is playing a dynamic role in sperm donor identification, but donors seem willing to donate again. Implication counseling regarding future linkage and contact from donor-conceived persons needs to be standardized for potential donors before donation.

'Doing' kinship: heterosexual parents' experiences of non-genetic parenthood through donor conception

RESEARCH QUESTION

How do Dutch heterosexual parents who achieved parenthood through donor conception navigate non-genetic parenthood and kinship?

DESIGN

A qualitative in-depth semi-structured interview study was performed between September 2018 and January 2019 with both partners of 13 Dutch heterosexual couples where the male partner suffered from infertility and who conceived a child with the help of a sperm donor. Interview questions were based on literature and clinical experiences of experts in the field of donor conception. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

All parents navigated non-genetic parenthood through 'doing' kinship: they negotiated the importance of nature versus nurture with regards to donor conception and non-genetic parenthood. Most parents perceived genetics as irrelevant for experiencing parenthood, bonding with their children and the preferred role of the donor in their future lives. Yet most of them found genetics relevant for generating similarities between the father and the child, and for wanting the same donor for all their children to ensure a full genetic relation among them. Additionally, based on the donor's genetic bond with the child, some men were anxious about the donor's role in the child's future life and the consequences for their position as a non-genetic father. A few women perceived genetics as relevant in terms of possible inherited illnesses from the donor.

CONCLUSIONS

Parents experienced several ambiguities regarding the role of genetics in donor conception and navigated 'doing' kinship in various ways. These aspects need to be taken into consideration during the counselling of prospective parents planning to conceive with donor conception.

Shifting to a model of donor conception that entails a communication agreement among the parents, donor, and offspring

Background

Some persons conceived with donor gametes react negatively when they found their birth via donor conception. They request access to information about and seek to communicate with the donor. However, some countries mandate donor anonymity. Other countries allow donor-conceived persons to access donor information, but they can only use this access if their parents have disclosed donor conception to them. We investigated a thorny issue of donor conception: whether donor conception should be shifted from an anonymous basis to a non-anonymous basis.

Methods

We review the issues and concerns regarding donor conception. We then consider the impact of direct-to-consumer genetic testing on donor conception, as well as the influence of donor conception on offspring’s identity and the potential of different types of donors. To discuss the future policy of donor conception, the policies on the anonymity of gamete donors were investigated using publicly-available documents in 15 countries.

Results

The aim of mandating donor anonymity is to protect the privacy of the donor and intended parents. However, the diffusion of direct-to-consumer genetic testing may make it impossible to maintain anonymity. Birth via donor conception shapes the offspring’s identity, and the donor may further influence the development of offspring’s identity through communications. It remains important to disclose donor conception to donor-conceived offspring and to provide them with donor information. However, that information might be insufficient for some donor-conceived persons. Here are benefits to having open-identity donors and known donors. Such donors can make an agreement with the parents regarding future communication with the offspring, although both sides should respect privacy. Subsequent counseling for all parties involved can result in better tripartite communication agreements.

Conclusions

In sum, ethical and practical issues that complicate donor anonymity are driving a shift to non-anonymous donor conception, in which all parties come to a communication agreement. To pave the way for such a donor conception system, transitional measures can be put into place. For countries that already adopted non-anonymous donor conception, ensuring the communication agreements is important to protect the rights of parents, donor, and offspring.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12910-022-00756-1.

The opposite of a step parent - The genetics without any of the emotion: 'sperm donors' reflections on identity-release donation and relatedness

This paper draws upon data from an online survey with closed- and open-ended questions completed by 168 identity-release sperm donors who had all donated in the UK between 2010 and 2016. Paying particular attention to the qualitative data obtained from the donors' responses to the open-ended questions, this paper explores the sperm donors' thoughts and feelings about being an identity-release donor and about future information exchange and contact with offspring conceived with their gametes. It shows that the majority of donors regarded identity-release donation as their preferred method of donation, supported the removal of anonymity, did not have concerns about being an identity-release donor and indeed saw positives for both the donor-conceived offspring and themselves. However, it also highlights that the donors' thoughts and feelings about being an identity-release sperm donor, how they saw themselves in relation to the individual conceived with their donation, and their preferences for information exchange and contact, varied greatly. The paper explores how identity-release donation is surrounding by many unknowns and consequentially sperm donors struggle to conceptualize what it means to be an identity-release sperm donor. As well as adding to the literature on donor conception, relatedness and kinship, by giving voice to sperm donors' own views and experience of the identity-release regulatory context, and their thoughts and feelings about future information exchange, this paper will help policy makers and clinicians prepare for the imminent time when donor-conceived individuals in the UK can start requesting their donor's identity.

Self-reported mental health status of donor sperm-conceived adults

While donor-conceived children have similar mental health outcomes compared to spontaneously conceived children, there is an inconsistency between studies investigating mental health outcomes of donor-conceived people in adulthood. This study is an online health survey that was completed by 272 donor sperm-conceived adults and 877 spontaneously conceived adults from around the world. Donor sperm-conceived adults had increased diagnoses of attention deficit disorder (P = 0.004), and autism (P = 0.044) in comparison to those conceived spontaneously. Donor sperm-conceived adults self-reported increased incidences of seeing a mental health professional (P < 0.001), identity formation problems (P < 0.001), learning difficulties (P < 0.001), panic attacks (P = 0.038), recurrent nightmares (sperm P = 0.038), and alcohol/drug dependency (P = 0.037). DASS-21 analysis revealed that donor sperm-conceived adults were also more stressed than those conceived spontaneously (P = 0.013). Both donor sperm and spontaneously conceived cohorts were matched for sex, age, height, alcohol consumption, smoking, exercise, own fertility, and maternal smoking. The increase in adverse mental health outcomes is consistent with some studies of donor-conceived adult mental health outcomes. These results are also consistent with the Developmental Origins of Health and Disease (DOHaD) phenomenon that has linked adverse perinatal outcomes, which have been observed in donor-conceived neonates, to increased risk of chronic disease, including mental health. Further work is required to reconcile our observations in adults to contrary observations reported in donor-conceived children.

The motivations of donor-conceived adults for seeking information about, and contact with, sperm donors

RESEARCH QUESTION

How do the demographic characteristics, mental health experiences and disclosure experiences of donor-conceived adults shape motivations for seeking information about their sperm donors, contact with them, or both?

DESIGN

Sixty-nine Australian adults who conceived through sperm donors completed an online survey. Uniquely, information and contact seeking were investigated as two distinct concepts.

RESULTS

Participants reported a variety of demographic, mental health, disclosure and discovery experiences. Most had been motivated to seek information about their donor (88%), contact with them (71%), or both. The most commonly reported motivations for each act were for medical information, expanding their identity and curiosity. Logistic regression findings were significant for wanting medical information as a motivation for seeking donor information (P = 0.03). Endorsement of this motivation was associated with self-reported anxiety (P = 0.02) and less likely as participant age increased (P = 0.02). Motivation to contact donors for medical information was associated with self-reported anxiety (P = 0.02) and depression (P = 0.01), and more likely when the participant was raised in a household that included the recipient co-parent (P = 0.04). As years since disclosure or discovery increased, participants were less likely to report wanting medical information as a motivation (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

Overall, participants were motivated to obtain information and seek contact with sperm donors. Motivations for each were similar despite participants varying in age and reporting a range of circumstances regarding disclosure, some of which were adverse.

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.

Reconceptualising the Interest in Knowing One's Origins: A Case for Mandatory Disclosure

The aim of this article is to make a case for mandatory disclosure in assisted reproduction. This refers to a system whereby those who are born through gamete donation and/or surrogacy would be notified about the manner of their birth and the availability of information about their genetic and/or gestational origins. The article argues that, to date, the law has interpreted an individual's interest in knowing their origins as being predominately about identity. However, the central importance of the principle of autonomy in the conceptualisation of this interest has been overlooked. A reconceptualisation of the interest in knowing one's origins as being concerned predominantly with autonomy provides a justification for mandatory disclosure. It is argued that the interest of individuals born through assisted reproduction in having autonomous choice regarding the significance of information about their origins should be prioritised over the autonomous choices of parents not to disclose to their offspring the manner of their birth.

Self-reported physical health status of donor sperm-conceived adults

Donor-conceived neonates have poorer birth outcomes, including low birth weight and preterm delivery that are associated with poorer long-term health in adulthood through the developmental origins of health and disease (DOHaD) theory. The aim of this study was to conduct the first investigation of the adult health outcomes of donor-conceived people. An online health survey was completed by 272 donor sperm-conceived adults and 877 spontaneously conceived adults from around the world. Donor and spontaneously conceived groups were matched for age, sex, height, smoking, alcohol consumption, exercise, own fertility and maternal smoking. Donor sperm-conceived adults had significantly higher reports of being diagnosed with type 1 diabetes (P = 0.031), thyroid disease (P = 0.031), acute bronchitis (P = 0.008), environmental allergies (P = 0.046), sleep apnoea (P = 0.037) and having ear tubes/grommets surgically implanted (P = 0.046). This is the first study to investigate the health outcomes of adult donor sperm-conceived people. Donor sperm-conceived adults self-reported elevated frequencies of various health conditions. The outcomes are consistent with birth defect data from donor sperm treatment and are consistent with the DOHaD linking perturbed early growth and chronic disease in adulthood.

The psychological wellbeing of ART children: what have we learned from 40 years of research?

Our understanding of what makes a family has changed dramatically in recent decades due to advances in reproductive technologies accompanied by changing social attitudes. But what has the impact been on children? This article presents a summary of research on parent-child relationships and the psychological adjustment of children in families created by assisted reproduction. The findings show that families with lesbian mothers, gay fathers, and single mothers by choice, and families created by donor conception and surrogacy, are just as likely to flourish as traditional families, and sometimes more so, although the children from these families will sometimes face prejudiced attitudes from others. It is concluded that the quality of family relationships and the wider social environment matter more for children's psychological wellbeing than the number, gender, sexual orientation, or biological relatedness of their parents.

Pregnancy outcomes following oocyte donation

The use of oocyte donation (OD) has increased continuously over the last three decades, and it is now an indispensable part of assisted reproductive technology (ART). With OD, it has become possible to overcome the biological barrier of ovarian follicle pool depletion and the general age-related decline in fertility. This review contains a thorough appraisal of the safety of OD with an analysis of short-term pregnancy outcomes. Salient up-to-date evidence was evaluated, which revealed that in comparison with both IVF with autologous oocytes, and naturally conceived pregnancies, there is: (i) an increased risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and preeclampsia; (ii) an increased risk of low birth weight and preterm birth and (iii) an increased risks of obstetric emergencies, following OD treatment. As a precaution, it is therefore highly encouraged to perform only single embryo transfer (SET) and to prescribe prophylactic low-dose aspirin during OD pregnancies.

The last vial. What it means to (aspiring) parents to use the same sperm donor for siblings

Introduction: A lot of attention has been given to the quest of parents, children and donors to find donor siblings (= half siblings who share the same donor gametes but who are born in different families). However, literature is scarce about the use of the same sperm donor for subsequent children in the same family.Methods: This study included 68 lesbian and heterosexual (aspiring) parents, recruited at the Department of Reproductive Medicine of Ghent University Hospital (Belgium). The in-depth semi-structured couple interviews were performed between October 2012 and October 2013. Data were analyzed through step-by-step inductive thematic analysis.Results: The couples showed a clear preference to use the same sperm donor for their children. The most common reasons for this preference were related to the family or sibling relationships and medical reasons. Uncertainty about the availability of the same donor over time seeped through in their stories. Most lesbian aspiring parents decided that both partners should have a genetic link with at least one child.Conclusion: The use of the same sperm donor for subsequent conceptions appeared quasi unambiguously in the interviews of the lesbian and heterosexual (aspiring) parents in our study.

Payment to gamete donors: equality, gender equity, or solidarity?

PURPOSE

Regulation of payment to gamete donors varies substantially across countries. The development of an ethically sustainable governance system of payments in gamete donation demands that the preferences of different stakeholders be heard. This study intends to contribute to improving the understanding of payment to gamete donors by analysing the views of donors and recipients about the preferred form of payment and its associations with their sociodemographic characteristics.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study included 70 donors and 172 recipients recruited at the Portuguese Public Bank of Gametes (July 2017-June 2018). Participants completed a self-reported questionnaire. Views about the preferred form of payment were collected through a multiple-choice question and an open-ended item. Associations were quantified through χ2 tests; content analysis was conducted with the open-ended answers.

RESULTS

Both donors (48.6%) and recipients (40.7%) considered that reimbursement is the preferred form of payment to ensure solidarity-based motivations to donate. This option was followed by compensation for non-financial losses (41.4% of donors; 33.7% of recipients) based on gender equity. Preference for a fixed reward (22.7% of recipients; 8.6% of donors) was less frequent among younger donors and married/living with a partner or employed recipients, being based on the promotion of equality.

CONCLUSION

In the context of the search for cross-border reproductive care and gamete circulation across countries, the findings from this study claim for the need to create solutions for payment to gamete donors that take into account gender equity and are simultaneously sensitive to donor's actual expenses and further health complications.

Anonymous sperm donors' attitude towards donation and the release of identifying information

INTRODUCTION

Belgian legislation allows only strictly anonymous gamete donation and known donation (donation to a recipient known by the donor). Recently, an amendment of the legislation was proposed to grant donor offspring, as of 18 years old, the right to claim identifying information about their donor.

PURPOSE

The aim is to explore the attitude of actual sperm donors towards donation and the release of identifying information and to investigate which donors would be willing to donate when anonymity would be prohibited by law.

METHODS

All men who were accepted as sperm donors (n = 242) by AZ Jan Palfijn Hospital (Ghent, Belgium) were invited to complete an anonymous online survey. The response rate was 65.5%.

RESULTS

One in five (20.1%; n = 30) would continue sperm donation upon a legislation change towards identifiable donation. Three in four donors (75.2%) would agree to provide basic non-identifiable information about themselves and one in three (32.9%) would provide extra non-identifiable information such as a baby photo or a personal letter. Almost half of the donors (45.6%) would agree to donate in a system where the hospital can trace the donor at the child's request and contact the donor, leaving it to the donor to decide whether or not to have contact with the requesting donor child.

CONCLUSION

These findings show that only one in five current donors would continue to donate when identifiable. The study also demonstrates that current donors think more positive about alternative options and that nearly half of them are willing to be contacted by the hospital at the donor child's request, providing the donor can decide at that time whether or not to release his identity.

The attitude of female students towards sperm donation by their partner

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to assess the attitude of heterosexual female students towards sperm donation by their partners and towards sperm donation in general.

METHODS

The method is an online anonymous survey of 1525 female students.

RESULTS

The majority of the women had a positive attitude towards sperm donation in general, but only 37% would support their partner if he would want to donate. The highest barriers to accepting donation by their partner were the fact that he would have one or more children that she would not know (55.8%) and the chance that he would be traced by his donor offspring (58.9%). There was a significant difference between the general attitude towards sperm donation as a fertility treatment and the attitude towards sperm donation by the partner.

CONCLUSIONS

Men rightly worry about their partner or future partner when they donated or consider donating sperm. Only about one in three women would support their partner if he would want to donate. The majority of women perceived sperm donation by their partner as an act that also concerns them and believed that they should be heard in this decision. To promote full informed consent, the relational component should be included in counselling donors, not only regarding the present but also regarding the (possible) future partner.

The interaction between donor-conceived families and their environment: parents' perceptions of societal understanding and attitudes regarding their family-building

Disclosure issues in relation to donor conception have mainly been examined in the context of relationships and interaction within donor-conceived families, whilst influences from outside the family, for example societal ones, have been little researched. This study explored the societal experiences of individuals who build their family with the help of donor conception (i.e. donor-conceived families), specifically, where and how parents and society interact and the presence and influence of cultural beliefs and values regarding the family. Belgian (n = 89) and Swedish (n = 56) donor-conceiving parents completed an online-survey focusing on their experiences with societal perceptions and attitudes and behaviour and responses from friends, healthcare professionals and teachers. Descriptive and comparative statistical analyses were conducted. Results showed that donor-conceiving parents were challenged by societal representations, responses from friends, healthcare professionals and teachers, and cultural norms and values. Parents had to cope with lack of knowledge and understanding of donor-conceived families and colliding views on the relevance of genes in kinship. They needed to be able to explain and defend themselves, correct others and handle emotions and sensitivity when managing these interactions. Through psycho-education health-care professionals can help families anticipate potential reactions and manage societal responses by strengthening parents' coping mechanisms. These findings also call for awareness of the presence of cultural norms and values even when counsellor and patient share the same culture because counsellor and donor-conceiving parents can relate differently to (collide or conform with them) the shared cultural norms, which can impact on parents' experience.

Ethical quandaries around expanded carrier screening in third-party reproduction

Although current screening methods of gamete donors are capable of reducing the incidence of genetic anomalies in donor offspring below general population levels, targeted screening for a large number of conditions (expanded carrier screening or ECS) could be considered as part of the routine selection procedure for gamete donors. There are, however, important drawbacks to its practical implementation. Excluding all carriers of severe recessive monogenic pediatric disorders would disqualify virtually all donors, and other approaches negatively affect cost (and therefore access), present dilemmas in regard to disclosure of genetic findings, and/or overburden the intended parents. In all of the scenarios considered, adequate genetic counseling will be of central importance. Besides looking at benefits and drawbacks of possible ways of implementing ECS, we also examine whether a moral obligation exists to adopt ECS at all and on whose shoulders such an alleged obligation would rest: policymakers, medical staff at fertility clinics, sperm and egg banks, the intended parents? We argue that given the small risk reduction brought about by ECS, the possible negative effects of its implementation, and the absence of widespread preconception carrier screening in the general population, it is inconsistent to argue that there is a moral obligation to perform ECS in the context of donor conception. Finally, implications for the donors are discussed.

'No daddy', 'A kind of daddy': words used by donor conceived children and (aspiring) parents to refer to the sperm donor

Research has shown that the recipients of donor sperm can experience difficulties finding appropriate language to refer to the donor. Based on two qualitative analysis techniques, namely word count and empirical discourse analysis, we studied the words used to refer to the donor in heterosexual and lesbian (aspiring) parents and in donor conceived children. Findings show that the words used in these households are highly diverse and have at least four different interlinked functions: (1) to position the donor in relation to the nuclear family; (2) to safeguard the role of the social parent; (3) to clarify family structure; and (4) to present a positive picture of the donor. Both parents and children consciously reflect on what words to use to refer to the donor. Although parents try to keep words like 'father' and 'daddy' out of the family narrative, children use these words. These findings show that it is important for healthcare personnel and policy makers to reflect on the careful use of terminology when they address questions around sperm donation because the terminology invokes specific meanings that have an effect on how the recipients and their children perceive the role of the donor.

Attitudes of sperm, egg and embryo donors and recipients towards genetic information and screening of donors

BACKGROUND

Gamete and embryo donors undergo genetic screening procedures in order to maximise the health of donor-conceived offspring. In the era of genomic medicine, expanded genetic screening may be offered to donors for the purpose of avoiding transmission of harmful genetic mutations. The objective of this study was to explore the attitudes of donors and recipients toward the expanded genetic screening of donors.

METHODS

Qualitative interview study with thematic analysis, undertaken in a tertiary fertility centre. Semi-structured in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with eleven recipients and nine donors from three different cohorts (sperm, egg and embryo donors/recipients).

RESULTS

Donors and recipients acknowledged the importance of genetic information and were comfortable with the existing level of genetic screening of donors. Recipients recognised some potential benefits of expanded genetic screening of donors; however both recipients and donors were apprehensive about extended genomic technologies, with concerns about how this information would be used and the ethics of genetic selectivity.

CONCLUSION

Participants in donor programs support some level of genetic screening of donors, but are wary of expanding genetic screening beyond current levels.

Non-donors' attitudes towards sperm donation and their willingness to donate

PURPOSE

The aim of this article is to study attitudes about sperm donation and willingness to donate sperm in students who have never shown an interest in sperm donation.

METHODS

The method used in this study is an electronic survey of 1012 male students.

RESULTS

Only one third of the respondents (34.3%) would consider donating sperm. Overall, 85.7% indicated a positive attitude towards sperm donation while 14.3% indicated a neutral or negative attitude. The highest scored barriers to donating were the lack of practical information and the fear that the partner would not agree. Almost 40% of the respondents feared that the donation might have a negative impact on their current or future relationship. The majority (83.6%) of those who considered donating thought donors should receive a financial compensation. Money was also one of the main motivators.

CONCLUSIONS

About 85% of the students thought positively about sperm donation but several factors such as perceived negative views by the social environment, especially the partner, may deter students from donating. This study indicates that the effect of strong incentives, for instance in monetary terms, on a donor pool consisting of students could be limited and that relational factors and donor's perceptions of the views of the wider social network should be taken into account when recruiting donors.

Donor Conception and "Passing," or; Why Australian Parents of Donor-Conceived Children Want Donors Who Look Like Them

This article explores the processes through which Australian recipients select unknown donors for use in assisted reproductive technologies and speculates on how those processes may affect the future life of the donor-conceived person. I will suggest that trust is an integral part of the exchange between donors, recipients, and gamete agencies in donor conception and heavily informs concepts of relatedness, race, ethnicity, kinship, class, and visibility. The decision to be transparent (or not) about a child's genetic parentage affects recipient parents' choices of donor, about who is allowed to "know" children's genetic backgrounds, and how important it is to be able to "pass" as an unassisted conception. In this way, recipients must trust the process, institutions, and individuals involved in their treatment, as well as place trust in the future they imagine for their child. The current market for donor gametes reproduces normative conceptions of the nuclear family, kinship, and relatedness by facilitating "matching" donors to recipients by phenotype and cultural affinities. Recipient parents who choose not to prioritize "matching," and actively disclose the process of children's conceptions, may embark on a project of queering heteronormative family structures and place great trust in both their own children and changing social attitudes to reduce stigma and generate acceptance for non-traditional families.

Experiences and Motives of Australian Single Mothers by Choice Who Make Early Contact with their Child's Donor Relatives

An increasing number of Australian parents of donor-conceived children are making contact with their child's donor relatives prior to their child reaching the age of majority. This process, often referred to as 'donor linking', can be achieved in Australia through either formal or informal mechanisms. Formal mechanisms exist in three states, each of which has legislation enabling donor linking in certain circumstances. Donor linking may also be achieved through informal mechanisms, such as online donor registries, social media searches, direct-to-consumer genetic testing, and fertility clinics which act as intermediaries between donors and recipients. Drawing on qualitative interview data, this article explores the donor linking practices of twenty-five single women who conceived using donated gametes. The findings suggest that early contact with donors is extremely popular among single women and that, even when formal legislative mechanisms are available, informal linking remains common.

Neonatal outcomes in pregnancies resulting from oocyte donation: a cohort study in Sweden

Background

Pregnancies resulting through oocyte donation have been associated with increased risk for adverse outcomes for the mother, such as gestational hypertensive disorders. However, little is known about possible neonatal complications of such pregnancies. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the neonatal health outcomes among singleton pregnancies in a population of relatively young and healthy oocyte recipients in Sweden, taking into account the medical indication leading to treatment.

Methods

This cohort study involved 76 women conceiving with donated oocytes, 149 age-matched nulliparous women conceiving spontaneously and 63 women conceiving after non-donor IVF. Participants were recruited during 2005–2008 and followed up until delivery. Data on neonatal outcomes were retrieved from the National Birth Medical Register and the medical records of oocyte recipients from seven Swedish University Hospitals with IVF clinics. Logistic regression analyses were performed to examine the association of mode of conception and neonatal outcomes, adjusted for maternal age and BMI, gestational age and delivery by cesarean section.

Results

Infants conceived through oocyte donation had higher odds for premature delivery [OR 2.36, 95 % CI (1.02–5.45)], for being small for gestational age [OR 4.23, 95 % CI (1.03–17.42)] and having Apgar score below 7 at 5 min [OR 10.57, 95 % CI (1.21–92.20)] compared to spontaneously conceived infants. Similar trends were observed when comparing infants conceived through oocyte donation to those conceived by traditional IVF. Furthermore, donor oocyte infants had a lower mean birthweight and length compared to autologous oocyte neonates (p = 0.013); however no differences were noted among infants born at term. Neonatal outcomes were more favorable among women with diminished ovarian reserve compared to those with other indications for oocyte donation.

Conclusions

Infants conceived after oocyte donation in Sweden have higher odds of being born prematurely and having lower mean birthweight in comparison to non-donor infants.

It seems that these unfavorable neonatal outcomes are present despite the age, weight and health restrictions applied to recipients before oocyte donation treatment in Sweden.

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.

A meta-analysis of sperm donation offspring health outcomes

Although the use of donor sperm as a treatment modality for male infertility has become common place, the health outcomes for those conceived has been poorly studied. A structured search of the literature using PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Reviews was performed to investigate the health outcomes of offspring conceived from donor sperm. Eight studies were eligible and included in the review, and of these, three were included in a meta-analysis. Meta-analysis of clinical outcomes showed that donor sperm neonates are not at increased risk of being born of low birth weight (<2500 g), preterm (<37 weeks) or with increased incidences of birth defects, than spontaneously conceived neonates.

Open-Identity Sperm Donation: How Does Offering Donor-Identifying Information Relate to Donor-Conceived Offspring's Wishes and Needs?

Over the past years, a growing number of countries have legislated open-identity donation, in which donor-conceived offspring are given access to the donor's identity once the child has reached maturity. It is held that donor anonymity creates identity problems for such children similar to the "genealogical bewilderment" described within the adoption context. The study of the social and psychological effects of open-identity donation is still very much in its infancy, but what has been left unquestioned is whether (and to what extent) offering access to the donor's name and address is an adequate response to such effects. This study has two goals: First, we aim to provide a systematic review of the reasons why donor-conceived (DC) offspring want to know the identity of their sperm donor. Second, we examine to what extent the provision of donor-identifying information can satisfy the reasons mentioned. The most important motivations appear to be: (1) to avoid medical risks and consanguineous relationships; (2) to satisfy curiosity; (3) to learn more about the self or to complete one's identity; (4) to learn more about what kind of person the donor is (biographical information, why he donated, etc.); (5) to form a relationship with the donor and/or his family; and (6) to learn about one's ancestry/genealogy. Our analysis shows that for nearly all of these reasons access to the donor's identity is not necessary. In those cases where it is, moreover, donor identification is not sufficient. What is really needed is (extended) contact with the donor, rather than the mere provision of his name.

Numerical limits in donor conception regimes: genetic links and 'extended family' in the era of identity disclosure

This article critically examines the setting of limits on the number of children or family groups that may be formed with a single donor in assisted conception regimes. Originally, under conditions of anonymity, numerical limits were said to contain the risk of inadvertent consanguinity between offspring who would not know, and could not know, that they were genetic half siblings, and also between donor and offspring. The increasing embrace of identity disclosure regimes has led to calls for stricter numerical limits based on the purported harm of being exposed to 'too many' genetic relatives in the future. This article asks: how many is too many? And how do we know? The UK and Australian positions are examined, and placed alongside a discussion of qualitative research involving interviews with twenty parents of donor conceived children.