Online sperm donation: a survey of the demographic characteristics, motivations, preferences and experiences of sperm donors on a connection website

Acceptance and rejection of "morally challenging" behaviour in online sperm donation communities: narrative interviews with recipients and donors

Introduction

Online sperm donation allows those hoping to conceive a baby ("recipients") to meet prospective sperm donors online, via "connection" websites or social media. These sites offer some advantages to clinical donation (including lower costs and greater choice over donation arrangements) but previous research has suggested that these sites may also pose risks and challenges to those who use them. Therefore, the aim of this exploratory research was to better understand online sperm donation communities and the experiences of both recipients and donors, particularly with respect to situations that could be "morally challenging" or involve harm.

Methods

Three prolific donors and five recipients were interviewed using an in-depth narrative approach. Carol Gilligan's Listening Guide was employed to analyse the data.

Results

The findings demonstrated that the donors sought to find ways to maintain autonomy in their donating practices and were concerned about the character and parenting abilities of recipients, as well as the potential for recipients to make unwarranted complaints. The recipients were concerned about their safety and finding a donor they could trust, discussing issues relating to donor "dishonesty", online abuse, and a lack of support from connection sites and related authorities. Both donors and recipients identified "morally challenging" behaviour relating to donor anonymity (donor use of fake online profiles or aliases) and the sexual motivations or (mis)conduct of some donors. The participants each discussed the ways in which they managed perceived risks.

Discussion

The degree to which the participants voiced their acceptance or rejection of challenging behaviour in online sperm donation communities varied across and within participants, highlighting the complexity of the way in which people interact in this environment. Further research is required to understand how this form of sperm donation can be as safe and supportive as possible, while also respecting the importance to donors and recipients of autonomy and choice when making donation arrangements.

Israeli students' perceptions regarding sperm donation: dilemmas reflections with dominant demographic effect

BACKGROUND

Sperm donation has undergone significant medical and social transformations in recent decades. This study aimed to explore Israeli students' perceptions towards sperm donation and investigate the potential influence of demographic characteristics on these perceptions.

DESIGN

The study encompassed 254 students from Tel-Aviv University, who completed an anonymous online survey in January-February 2021. This cross-sectional quantitative online survey, comprised 35 questions categorized into three sections: demographic data, assessment of prior knowledge, and perceptions of sperm donation (general perceptions related to both positive and negative stigmas associated with sperm donation, the roles and activities of sperm banks, and considerations surrounding identity disclosure versus the anonymity of sperm donors and their offspring).

RESULTS

Participants exhibited a relatively low level of prior knowledge (mean 31.2 ± 19 of 100). Scores for positive and negative stigmas ranged from 1.3 to 2.2. Notably, the statement "Donors' anonymity preservation is crucial to maintain sperm donation" received a mean of 3.7. Seeking for anonymous sperm donation identity both by recipients and offspring was ranked with low means (1.5 and 1.7, respectively). However, the pursuit of half-siblings by mothers or siblings themselves received higher ratings ranging from 2.7 to 3. Women's stigma ranking were notably lower, while men emphasized the importance of donor anonymity.

CONCLUSIONS

Sperm Banks hold a position of medical authority rather than being perceived as being commercial entity. The preservation of donor anonymity is widely accepted as a crucial element, prioritized over the requests for identity disclosure from recipients and offspring. Demographic parameters exhibit a strong and precise effects on participants' perceptions.

Embodied sociotechnical imaginaries: how donor-conceived people imagine identity, family and reprodigital futures beyond regulation

Sociological scholarship has begun to explore imaginaries of family and reproduction, yet less work has focused on the emerging social form of the donor family. In this article, we consider the embodied sociotechnical imaginaries of donor-conceived people, exploring their reflections, judgements, hopes, and predictions regarding donor conception. Combining reflexive thematic analysis of free-text survey responses from sperm donor-conceived (n = 90) and egg donor-conceived (n = 1) and data from semi-structured interviews with sperm donor-conceived people (n = 28), conceived in both clinical and non-clinical contexts in Australia, we analyse donor-conceived people's imaginings of family, identity, and the practice of donor conception in the digital age. Our analysis centres the donor-conceived body that imagines, and in doing so, highlights the entanglements of reproductive and digital technologies, and the humans and institutions that drive their uptake. We argue that leveraging the imaginative and political capacities of donor-conceived people is a productive approach that illuminates possible (re)directions of the assisted reproduction industry as well as illustrating potential policy futures.

Sperm donors versus long-term mates: a comparison of preferences of heterosexual and lesbian women

The present study aimed to explore whether lesbian women's preferences for a sperm donor or a long-term mate show a pattern similar to those of heterosexual women. Three hundred and eighty-three donor insemination patients, of whom 278 were heterosexual and 105 were lesbian, completed a questionnaire comprising a series of 35 traits and rated the importance of each trait in a sperm donor and again in a long term mate. Results showed that traits relating to socioeconomic status, genetic background and general health, physical appearance, and personality were rated by lesbian women as more important in a long-term mate than in a sperm donor. It was further found that both heterosexual and lesbian women attached higher importance to the socioeconomic status, personality and physical appearance of the long-term mate than of the sperm donor; heterosexual women attached similar importance to the genes and health of a long-term mate and a sperm donor, while lesbian women attached greater importance to the genetic background and general health of the sperm donor than those of a long-term mate. The implications and interpretations of the findings are discussed in light of Trivers' parental investment theory.

The case for reframing known donation

Contemporary UK egg and sperm donation exists in two predominant forms: (i) clinic-based, identity-release donation; and (ii) known donation, which can take place either inside or outside of the clinic context. Regulatory and clinical discussions of the latter currently focus, almost exclusively, on risk whereas identity-release is widely presented as the default route for both donors and recipients. Consequently, there is little support available for those potential donors and recipient parents who might prefer a known donor arrangement. In this commentary, we reflect on our sociological research with donors and parents through donor conception and argue that there are a number of reasons why known donation may, in some contexts, offer advantages over identity-release donation. Whilst this research also demonstrates that there can be challenges involved in known donation, these are not inevitable nor are challenges absent from identity-release routes. It is timely and important to question whether the current de-valuing of known donation compared with identity-release donation holds up to academic scrutiny. We argue for a more balanced approach in which the benefits and challenges of both known and identity-release routes are discussed with donors and recipients and for increased support for known donation in clinics and by regulatory bodies.

Asked to be a sperm donor: disclosure dilemmas of gay men living with HIV

Previous research has documented the various challenges people living with HIV face as they navigate intimate relationships, including what is often referred to as disclosure. In studies of gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men, the issue of telling or not telling others about an HIV-positive status has been examined primarily in relation to communication with sexual partners, with few studies focusing on other aspects of intimacy. Drawing on interviews with gay men living with HIV, conducted in four clinics in London, this article explores the narratives of men who have been asked by female friends about the possibility of being a sperm donor. The narratives highlight layers of complexity which have received little attention, not only in research on HIV but also in studies of sperm donation and co-parenting. The article advances dialogue between these two largely separate bodies of work. Our data suggest that reluctance to share an HIV-positive status with others can be an important factor in deciding how to answer the 'sperm donor question'. Examining reproductive relationships of a specific kind - those based on friendships between women and gay men - the article develops the understanding of how secrecy about HIV shapes intimate lives.

Motivational stimuli to donate sperm among non-donor students

BACKGROUND

Sperm banks face a continuously evolving gap between the increasing demand for sperm donation (SD) vs. limited available reserve. To improve donors' recruitment and increase supply, motivations towards SD should be investigated specifically among young men who have the potential to become donors. Our aim was to evaluate factors which increase and decrease predisposition to donate sperm among non-donor students, who represent a "potential pool" for possible donors' recruitment.

RESULTS

Ninety-three men fulfilled the questionnaire with mean age of 28.2 ± 4.5 years. The most powerful incentive to donate sperm was financial reward followed by a willingness to help others to build a family (3.8 and 3.4, respectively). The most dominant consideration to decline donation was the fear of anonymity loss and future regret (4 and 3.8). While participants' willingness for anonymous SD was fair (2.8), the open-identity donation was rated significantly lower (1.75, p < 0.01). Familiarity with recipients and offspring had lower scores (1.9-2.2) as well.

CONCLUSIONS

Young single men represent a suitable cohort for anonymous donation. Financial reward and willingness to help others are important positive incentives while anonymity preservation is crucial to maintain their willingness towards SD. Regulatory shifting towards open-identity SD necessitates the establishment of an alternative "potential pool" population as a reliable source to recruit donors.

Understanding the Reasons Why Men and Women Do Not Donate Gametes

The global under-supply of sperm and oocyte donors is a serious concern for assisted reproductive medicine. Research has explored self-selected populations of gamete donors and their ex-post rationalisations of why they chose to donate. However, such studies may not provide the necessary insight into why the majority of people do not donate. Utilising the unique open form responses of a large sample (n = 1035) of online survey respondents, we examine the reasons participants cite when asked: “Why haven’t you donated your sperm/eggs?.” We categorise these responses into four core themes (conditional willingness, barriers, unconsidered, and conscientious objector) and eleven lower-order themes. We find that, on average, women are more conditionally willing (8.2% difference; p = 0.008) to participate in gamete donation than men. We also find that women are more likely than men to justify their non-donation based on their reproductive history (21.3% difference; p = 0.000) or kin selection and inclusive fitness (5.7% difference; p = 0.008). However, compared to women, men are more likely to validate their non-donation based on sociocultural or social norms (6% difference; p = 0.000) or religion (1.7% difference; p = 0.030). That so many of our study participants report in-principal willingness for future participation in gamete donation speaks to the need for increased research on understanding non-donor population preferences, motivations, and behaviours.

Medical ethics when moving towards non-anonymous gamete donation: the views of donors and recipients

Drawing on the views of donors and recipients about anonymity in a country that is experiencing a transition towards non-anonymous gamete donation mandated by the Constitutional Court, we explore how the intersection between rights-based approaches and an empirical framework enhances recommendations for ethical policy and healthcare. Between July 2017 and April 2018, 69 donors and 147 recipients, recruited at the Portuguese Public Bank of Gametes, participated in this cross-sectional study. Position towards anonymity was assessed through an open-ended question in a self-report questionnaire, which was subject to content analysis. Preference for an anonymous donation regime was mentioned by 82.6% of donors and 89.8% of recipients; and all those with children. Instead of the rights-based reasoning used by the Constitutional Court, donors highlighted concerns over future relationships and recipients focused on socioethical values linked with the safeguard of safety, privacy and confidentiality. The remaining participants advocated the choice between anonymity or non-anonymity (double-track policy), invoking respect for their autonomy. The complex, diverse ethical views and reasoning of donors and recipients expand a traditionally dichotomous discussion. Their perspectives challenge the transition towards non-anonymity and international guidelines, raising awareness to the need for their involvement in the design of policies to enable choice according to their values and preferences, and of psychosocial counselling responsive to their socioethical concerns and sensitive to their parental status. Empirical frameworks complement rights-based approaches to uphold justice, fairness and equal respect, and to incorporate utility, beneficence and non-maleficence in policymaking and healthcare in the transition towards non-anonymity.

Reproductive outcomes of women aged 40 and older undergoing IVF with donor sperm

STUDY QUESTION

Do women ≥40 years old without a male partner who utilize donor sperm have the same reproductive outcomes as those who utilize their partner's sperm?

SUMMARY ANSWER

After controlling for relevant confounders, women ≥40 years old using donor sperm for IVF have significantly higher odds of having a live birth compared to those utilizing their partner's sperm.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Women who are unpartnered or in same-sex relationships are by definition not infertile, but may choose to conceive using donor sperm. It is not known how IVF outcomes are affected with the use of donor sperm compared to women utilizing their partner's sperm, particularly at very advanced maternal ages.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

This is a retrospective cohort study conducted at a university-affiliated center of women undergoing IVF with fresh embryo transfer between 2008 and 2018.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Patients were divided into two groups based on the ejaculated sperm source utilized: donor or partner sperm. Live birth rate was the primary outcome. Pregnancy rate was the secondary outcome. Multivariable logistic regression was performed and adjusted for age, the developmental stage of the embryo, and the number of embryos transferred. Unadjusted odds ratio (OR) and adjusted OR (aOR) with 95% CI for pregnancy and live birth were estimated. Statistical significance was denoted by P < 0.05.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

A total of 3910 cycles in women ≥40 years old were analyzed, of which 307 utilized donor sperm and 3603 utilized their partner's sperm to conceive. In the univariate analysis, patients utilizing donor sperm were found to have similar pregnancy rates as those utilizing partner sperm (41.0 vs 39.8%, OR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.75-1.20). After adjusting for age, the number of embryos transferred and the developmental stage of the embryos, the model estimates did not vary (aOR: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.95-1.56). Similarly, the univariate analysis for live birth did not demonstrate a difference between groups (19.2 vs 17.8%, OR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.67-1.22). However, after a similar adjustment was made for confounders, the use of donor sperm was associated with statistically significant increased odds of live birth (aOR: 1.38, 95% CI: 1.01-1.88).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

As with any retrospective study, the potential for residual confounding exists, despite attempts to control for this with regression modeling.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Women ≥40 years old who are unpartnered or in same-sex relationships can be counseled that their odds of a live birth are slightly better than women in heterosexual relationships utilizing their partner's sperm. These findings serve to further refine and individualize counseling on the expected IVF outcomes for women in this population.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

No funding was sought for this study. The authors declare no competing interests.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

Motivations and Attitudes of Men Towards Sperm Donation: Whom to Donate and Why?

BACKGROUND

The widespread access to medically assisted reproduction (MAR) techniques for all women, regardless of any infertility diagnosis, has led to an increased, but as yet unmet, demand for sperm donors in Portugal. For this study, we deployed an online survey to explore men's motivations for donating and their attitudes toward anonymity and donating for specific groups.

METHOD

The study's sample comprised men who were eligible to donate sperm (N = 282). The relationships between these factors and participants' psychological and sociodemographic characteristics were also explored.

RESULTS

The results mostly indicated altruistic reasons for donating, positive attitudes toward anonymity, and a greater willingness to donate to infertile women. Overall, sexual orientation was not associated with the participants' attitudes and motivations. Age, education level, conscientiousness, empathic concern, and conservative and religious values were associated with the participants' motivations and attitudes toward sperm donation.

CONCLUSION

Recruitment campaigns should therefore consider the specific motivations, attitudes, and psychosocial characteristics of potential sperm donors. Indeed, parenthood is a universal right, so sperm donation should be encouraged, regardless of recipients' fertility status. Clear information about the identifiability of sperm donors should also be provided.

Human Rights and Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART): A Contractarian Approach

What are human rights? Do they exist? I propose to answer these questions by advancing a contractarian account of human rights. I focus on the human right to found a family and have children. I also show how the contractarian approach to human rights can explain the current relevance of reproductive rights in the human rights discourse, and how the emergence of ART (Assisted Reproductive Technologies) has contributed to this shift. The contractarian account of human rights asks, firstly, the following question: which basic needs and desires can be ascribed to any human being regardless of gender, nationality, sexual orientation, age, ethnicity etc.? Having an interest, for instance, in preserving one’s own bodily integrity, freedom, and private property qualifies as a basic human need or basic desire. But a basic human need or desire does not constitute in itself a human right. Secondly, the contractarian account of human rights asks, then, which basic human needs or basic desires individuals and states representatives would consider so important that they would agree to create institutional frameworks, both at the domestic and international level, in such a way as to enable individuals to pursue the fulfilment of their basic needs or desires without state interference. Human rights exist and can only be claimed in the context of these normative frameworks.

A comparison of the characteristics, motivations, preferences and expectations of men donating sperm online or through a sperm bank

STUDY QUESTION

How do the demographic characteristics, motivations, experiences and expectations of unregulated sperm donors (men donating sperm online through a connection website) compare to sperm donors in the regulated sector (men donating through a registered UK sperm bank)?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Online donors were more likely to be older, married and have children of their own than sperm bank donors, were more varied in their preferences and expectations of sperm donation, and had more concerns about being a sperm donor.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

While studies have examined motivations and experiences of both regulated sperm bank, and unregulated online sperm donors, no study has directly compared these two groups of donors.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

An email was sent to the 576 men who were registered sperm donors at the London Sperm Bank, the UK’s largest sperm bank regulated by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA), who had commenced donation between January 2010 and December 2016, and had consented to be contacted for research. The online survey, which contained multiple choice and open-ended questions, was completed by 168 men over a 7-week period. The responses were compared to those of sperm donors registered on Pride Angel, a large UK-based connection website for donors and recipients of sperm: our research team had already collected these data. In total, 5299 sperm donors were on Pride Angel at time of data capture and 400 men had completed a similar survey. The responses of 70 actual online sperm donors (i.e. those whose sperm had been used to conceive at least one child) were used for comparison with the sperm bank donors.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

The survey obtained data on the sperm donors’ demographic characteristics, motivations, experiences and expectations of sperm donation. Data from sperm bank donors were compared to online donors to examine differences between the two groups. The study compared online and clinic donors who had all been accepted as sperm donors: online donors who had been ‘vetted’ by recipients and sperm bank donors who had passed the rigorous screening criteria set by the clinic.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

A response rate of 29% was obtained from the sperm bank donors. Online donors were significantly older than sperm bank donors (mean ± SD: 38.7 ± 8.4 versus 32.9 ± 6.8 years, respectively) and were more likely to have their own children (p < 0.001 for both characteristics). Both groups rated the motivation ‘I want to help others’ as very important. Online donors rated ‘I don’t want to have children myself’, ‘to have children/procreate’ and ‘to enable others to enjoy parenting as I have myself’ as more important than sperm bank donors, whereas sperm bank donors rated financial payment as more important than online donors, as well as confirmation of own fertility. Most (93.9%) online donors had donated their sperm elsewhere, through other connection sites, fertility clinics, sperm banks or friends and family, compared to only 2.4% of sperm bank donors (p < 0.001). There was a significant difference in how donors viewed their relationship to the child, with online donors much less likely than sperm bank donors to see their relationship as a ‘genetic relationship only’. Online donors had more concerns about being a donor (p < 0.001), for example, being concerned about ‘legal uncertainty and child financial support’ and ‘future contact and uncertainty about relationship with donor-conceived child’.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Findings may not be representative of all sperm donors as only one online connection site and one HFEA registered sperm bank were used for recruitment.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Despite concern regarding shortages of sperm donors in licensed clinics and unease regarding the growing popularity of unregulated connection websites, this is the first study to directly compare online and sperm bank donors. It highlights the importance of considering ways to incorporate unregulated online sperm donors into the regulated sector. With many online donors well aware of the legal risks they undertake when donating in the unregulated online market, this would both increase the number of sperm donors available at clinics but also provide legal protection and support for donors.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This study was supported by the Wellcome Trust Grants 104 385/Z/14/Z and 097857/Z/11/Z. The authors have no conflicts of interest.

The Ethics of Genetic Cognitive Enhancement: Gene Editing or Embryo Selection?

Recent research with human embryos, in different parts of the world, has sparked a new debate on the ethics of genetic human enhancement. This debate, however, has mainly focused on gene-editing technologies, especially CRISPR (Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats). Less attention has been given to the prospect of pursuing genetic human enhancement by means of IVF (In Vitro Fertilisation) in conjunction with in vitro gametogenesis, genome-wide association studies, and embryo selection. This article examines the different ethical implications of the quest for cognitive enhancement by means of gene-editing on the one hand, and embryo selection on the other. The article focuses on the ethics of cognitive enhancement by means of embryo selection, as this technology is more likely to become commercially available before cognitive enhancement by means of gene-editing. This article argues that the philosophical debate on the ethics of enhancement should take into consideration public attitudes to research on human genomics and human enhancement technologies. The article discusses, then, some of the recent findings of the SIENNA Project, which in 2019 conducted a survey on public attitudes to human genomics and human enhancement technologies in 11 countries (France, Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain, Sweden, Brazil, South Africa, South Korea, and United States).

Egg donors' motivations, experiences, and opinions: A survey of egg donors in South Africa

The objective of this study was to gain information from egg donors in South Africa (SA) which could be pertinent to policy development on egg donation. The study was conducted on egg donors in the database of a Cape Town-based egg donation agency who donated within a year preceding the study. 150 egg donors from the population of 226 participated in an online survey. The main results are: 95% of respondents experienced egg donation as being positive. However, 7% of respondents report not giving proper informed consent, and a similar percentage of respondents also report not knowing whether any medical risks actually materialised as sequelae to their donations. This is a cause for concern and should be investigated further. Regarding donor anonymity, which is currently the legal position in SA, 79% of respondents indicated that they would still have donated had they been legally required to release their identities. Accordingly, possible legal reform away from the current system of donor anonymity seems unlikely to significantly impact the supply of donated eggs. Regarding motivation, respondents report being primarily motivated by wanting to help infertile women. However, respondents believe that a fair and realistic amount of compensation would be about 60% higher than what is currently paid as the national standard fixed amount. This fixed-amount compensation system should be further investigated in terms of its legality, impact on donor profile, and its current amount.

Worlds apart or two sides of the same coin? Attitudes, meanings, and motives of potential oocyte and sperm donors in Austria

Purpose

Gamete donors and recipients of such donations have been explored by previous studies, which mostly focus on post-donation scenarios. Our study analyses the general willingness to donate oocytes or sperm and focuses on differences between potential female and male donors in attitudes, meanings, and motives in a pre-donation setting.

Methods

An electronic survey (n = 555 students) was used in this anonymous observational study. To enable comparisons between men and women regarding their attitudes, meanings, and motives and their willingness to donate gametes, we designed two separate questionnaires.

Results

The sample was divided into three groups based on the willingness to donate: potential donors (n = 133; women: 48.1%, men: 51.9%); doubtful donors (n = 207; women: 75.8%, men: 24.2%); and non-donors (n = 215; women: 68.3%, men: 31.7%). The group of potential male donors (39.2%) was significantly larger than the group of potential female donors (16.9%). Significant differences regarding altruism, the meaning of one’s self-worth, and passing on the own genes were found between doubtful and potential donors. Potential donors attached less value to altruism but more value to the enhancement of one’s self-worth and passing on one’s genes than doubtful donors. The motive of passing on one’s genes and altruistic motives were more important to men than to women.

Conclusion

This study helps to create a better understanding of potential donors in the existing donation framework and supports the evaluation of the given regimes in the context of designing an improved framework.

The Uruguayan semen donor population: A twenty-eight-year retrospective study

Several studies have reported a global decline in seminal quality over the years. The objective of this study was to describe the semen donor population of Uruguay through comparing data of successive samples banked by the same donors and the analysis of their semen and physical characteristics, ancestry origin and educational level. A total of 3,449 ejaculated samples collected from 71 donors, cryobanked between 1989 and March 2017 at Fertilab, were analysed. Results revealed a mean age of 23.90 ± 3.98 years, an average weight of 74.95 ± 1.09 kg and a mean height of 1.78 ± 0.06 m. The majority of the donors trace their origin to Europe (74.65%, 53/71) and 66.19% (47/71) have a level of education higher than secondary school. We observed longitudinal differences in two parameters, that is sperm concentration and semen volume. Sperm concentration declined, while semen volume increased significantly over the 28-year period. The results of the present study are in accordance with that of previous articles that also reported a decline in sperm concentration over time. However, no differences were observed in total sperm number per ejaculate due to the increase in semen volume values, thus reflecting no real changes in sperm production over time.

Un/familiar connections: on the relevance of a sociology of personal life for exploring egg and sperm donation

In recent decades, reproductive medicine has become a widespread global phenomenon. Within the field, donor conception, and the use of donated eggs, sperm or embryos from a third party, plays a key role. Despite the importance of those individuals who donate, there has been scant research exploring their experiences. Seeking to contribute to the growing, albeit still small, body of research on donors, this paper advocates bringing the process of donating into dialogue with a sociology of personal life. It suggests that important new insights about the donor experience can be achieved by utilising such a theoretical perspective. The paper applies a broad framework of a sociology of personal life to demonstrate that the decision to donate reverberates within donors' everyday lives and relationships, and explores, primarily theoretically, how it is that acts of donation bring such issues into play. To this end, the paper examines in detail three ways in which donating interacts with dimensions that are integral to personal life: "living" genetic connectedness, relationality and the intimate body. Ultimately, the paper suggests that a sociology of personal life shows light on new, unexplored questions for this field that demand greater scholarly attention.

Effects of maternal body mass index on pregnancy outcome after 8570 artificial insemination cycles with donor's sperm

Increased body mass index (BMI) might have an adverse effect on pregnancy. However, the influence of BMI on the pregnancy outcomes after artificial insemination with donor's sperm (AID) had been rarely reported. This study aimed to investigate the correlation between BMI and AID. The pregnancy outcome of 8570 AID cycles was retrospectively analyzed. BMI was categorized as underweight (<18.5 kg/m²; group A), normal weight (18.5-23.9 kg/m²; group B), overweight (24-27.9 kg/m²; group C), and obese (≥28 kg/m²; group D). The results showed that cumulative pregnancy rate and cumulative live birth rate in groups A, B, C and D tended to decrease as BMI increased; however, abortion rate, and ectopic pregnancy rate in groups A, B, C, and D exhibited a gradual increase in the tendency. Cesarean delivery rate also increased as BMI increased. Birth defect rate in the group D were significantly higher than that in the group A. Interestingly, the pregnancy rate was gradually decreased with increasing age in groups A, B, and C, but this was not observed in the group D. The findings suggested that BMI can affect the pregnancy outcomes after AID; it is important to achieve a normal BMI prior to AID treatments.

Clinical vs. exclusively online sperm donors: what's the difference?

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

As the growth of the internet and commercial connection websites increasingly facilitates sperm donation outside of clinical (formal) settings, studies looking into informal (online) donor psychology and behaviour are both extremely warranted and currently under-researched. This study's aim was to identify key differences between informal donor males with a history of clinical donation, and those who exclusively participate in the informal market.

METHODS

The study utilises (N = 112) current informal sperm donors' demographics and personality traits taken from registered members of the connection website PrideAngel (Nov-Dec 2016). This study conducts probit multivariate and interaction analysis of socioeconomic and personality factors to explore key differences in males who have chosen to exclusively donate through connection websites and those with a clinical history.

RESULTS

Results from this sample show that exclusively informal donors are more likely to be in some form of committed relationship. Exclusively informal males are also more likely to identify as a sexuality other than heterosexual (e.g. gay, bisexual or asexual). Also, exclusively informal participants exhibit higher average scores for the personality trait agreeableness.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, this study demonstrates key differences in the relationship status, sexuality and personality traits of a new and burgeoning group of males and their reproductive psychology and behaviour.

Using an introduction website to start a family: implications for users and health practitioners

Donor insemination treatment offered in licensed clinics protects the donor, recipient and offspring both medically and legally. The Internet has opened up novel, unregulated ways of donating sperm through 'introduction websites' and social media forums. Broadly, three categories of women use introduction websites: those who want to have a child with no further involvement of the donor; those who wish to know the identity of the donor from the start; and those who intend to electively co-parent, that is, to bring up the child together with the donor/father. Donors may choose to donate through introduction websites for altruistic reasons and/or in order to have greater involvement with the child. There are some donors who are motivated by the prospect of a sexual encounter, advertising their preference for 'natural insemination' - i.e. via sexual intercourse or partial intercourse. When people make their own arrangements online, they may do so in the absence of clear, accurate information. This article, sets out some of the issues that recipients and donors ought to consider before embarking on unregulated sperm donation.

Why search for a sperm donor online? The experiences of women searching for and contacting sperm donors on the internet

Whilst studies have examined the experiences of women who use clinic donors, to date there has been limited research investigating women’s motivations and experiences of searching for a sperm donor online. A total of 429 women looking for a sperm donor on Pride Angel (a website that facilitates contact between donors and recipients) completed an online survey. Fifty-eight percent (249) saw advantages of obtaining donated sperm online with the most common advantage reported as being able to connect with and meet the donor (n = 50 (24%)). A third (n = 157 (37%)) of the participants gave disadvantages, the most common reported was encountering ‘dishonest donors’ (n = 63 (40%)). Most recipients (n = 181 (61%)) wanted the donor to be ‘just a donor’ (i.e. to provide sperm and have no further contact). Whilst it was important for recipients to know the identity of the donor, some did not see this as important for the child and thus the level of information that parents have about the donor, and that which the child has, can differ. Finding a donor online blurs the distinction between categories of ‘anonymous’, ‘known’ and ‘identity release’ donations. Whilst the survey had a large sample size, the representativeness of the sample is not known.