Secrets and disclosure in donor conception

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.

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.

Direct-to-consumer genetic testing and the changing landscape of gamete donor conception: key issues for practitioners and stakeholders

RESEARCH QUESTION

What effect does direct-to-consumer genetic testing (DTCGT) have on information finding and sharing in relation to gamete donor conception?

DESIGN

This study used in-depth qualitative interviews with parents through donor conception, donors, the relatives of donors and donor-conceived people who have used, or considered using, DTCGT. Interviews were conducted between September 2021 and February 2023. Sixty people defined themselves as having been affected by donor conception and DTCGT. Fifty-seven of these were resident in the UK at the time of interview. The final sample included 19 (spermatozoa, egg or embryo) donors, 25 donor-conceived people, 20 parents through donor conception and two relatives of donors. Five participants occupied more than one of these roles.

RESULTS

The rise of DTCGT is affecting how information about donor conception is managed: it shifts patterns of knowledge about donor conception; increases flexibility regarding the age of access to information about donor relatives; can lead to a growing role for non-professionals, including wider family members, in gatekeeping information about donor conception; accentuates the effect of donor conception for donors' and the relatives of donor-conceived people; and shapes, and is shaped, by the formal regulatory donor information management systems.

CONCLUSION

Fertility professionals should inform people using, or considering, donor conception, or (potential) donors, about the different ways DTCGT can affect sharing information about donor conception. Support is needed for those affected by these changes.

The influence of avoidant attachment and perceived support on disclosure about involvement in donor-assisted conception to family and friends

STUDY QUESTION

Do the attachment-related dimensions Anxiety and Avoidance and perceived partner and social support in recipients and donors influence disclosure to others about their involvement in donor-assisted conception (DAC)?

SUMMARY ANSWER

A higher global score on attachment Avoidance was associated with greater non-disclosure about involvement in DAC by participants to relationship-specific others.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Within the context of DAC, the topic of disclosure has been investigated in terms of the 'if', 'when', and the 'how' to disclose about circumstances of conception. Less focus, however, has been directed to investigating psychological theoretical frameworks that influence disclosure decisions to others, i.e. to whom information is disclosed and to what extent details are transparently revealed about the donor programme.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

The study was of a cross-sectional design and utilized a sample of 301 participants who were, or had been, involved in DAC, and were recruited across states of Australia. An online self-report questionnaire was completed between June 2014 and June 2017.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

English speaking participants consisting of 209 female recipients and 92 donors (36 sperm; 48 egg; 8 embryo donors). Of the recipients, 104 had successfully conceived children via donated gametes (68 sperm, 23 eggs, 6 embryos, and 7 recipients where both gametes were donated from 2 donors to create the embryo). Participants anonymously completed an online questionnaire consisting of five sections: Demographics, Donor Conception and Disclosure Practices, the Experiences in Close Relationships-Relationships Structure, the Quality of Relationship Inventory, and the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support. Pearson correlations, independent samples t-tests, Chi-square, and ANOVA were used to explore the association between attachment Anxiety and Avoidance scores and disclosure about involvement in a DAC programme to significant others (i.e. parents, siblings, in-laws, and friends).

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Compared to published community cohort data, participants reported lower global scores on attachment Anxiety and Avoidance and high levels of romantic partner and social network support, suggestive of secure relationships in the overall study sample. A higher score on attachment Avoidance was associated with less disclosure to significant others in their social network (i.e. parents, siblings, in-laws, and close friends), even in the presence of strong partner support (partial r = -0.248, P = 0.005). Higher scores on attachment Avoidance were inversely associated with level of perceived partner and social network support (all P < 0.05). Irrespective of attachment scores, more than 90% of all participants agreed that a child born of DAC should be told about mode of conception.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

This study utilized a cross-sectional design precluding causal inferences between dimensions of insecure attachment and disclosure practices. Participants were required to self-report on the quality of their relationships with the potential for social desirability respondent bias. The study's self-selecting sample may limit generalization to participants who were dis-inclined to participate. Specifically, respondents who have an Avoidant attachment style, may have elected not to participate in the study.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Given the increased use of biotechnology and digital facial recognition enabling self-discovery of the donor and the donor's extended family, non-disclosure about involvement in DAC may have consequences. An 'Avoidant' attachment style is important to assess as a potential risk factor for non-disclosure about involvement in DAC across different relational contexts (e.g. close family members and friends). Fertility counsellors should consider introducing a measure of attachment screening as a pre-emptive psychoeducational strategy during donor implications counselling. This information could be used to offer patients insight into concerns they have about DAC disclosures to key important relationships, providing a target of clinical intervention.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

No external funds were sought for this work. None of the authors have any competing interests to declare.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

Development of the Tool to Empower Parental Telling and Talking (TELL Tool): A digital decision aid intervention about children's origins from donated gametes or embryos

Objective

This study aimed to create and develop a well-designed, theoretically driven, evidence-based, digital, decision Tool to Empower Parental Telling and Talking (TELL Tool) prototype.

Methods

This developmental study used an inclusive, systematic, and iterative process to formulate a prototype TELL Tool: the first digital decision aid for parents who have children 1 to 16 years of age and used donated gametes or embryos to establish their families. Recommendations from the International Patient Decision Aids Standards Collaboration and from experts in decision aid development, digital health interventions, design thinking, and instructional design guided the process.

Results

The extensive developmental process incorporated researchers, clinicians, parents, children, and other stakeholders, including donor-conceived adults. We determined the scope and target audience of the decision aid and formed a steering group. During design work, we used the decision-making process model as the guiding framework for selecting content. Parents' views and decisional needs were incorporated into the prototype through empirical research and review, appraisal, and synthesis of the literature. Clinicians' perspectives and insights were also incorporated. We used the experiential learning theory to guide the delivery of the content through a digital distribution plan. Following creation of initial content, including storyboards and scripts, an early prototype was redrafted and redesigned based on feedback from the steering group. A final TELL Tool prototype was then developed for alpha testing.

Conclusions

Detailing our early developmental processes provides transparency that can benefit the donor-conceived community as well as clinicians and researchers, especially those designing digital decision aids. Future research to evaluate the efficacy of the TELL Tool is planned.

Counselling challenges associated with donor conception and surrogacy treatments - time for debate

Fertility counselling services have had to respond to significant developments in fertility treatments in recent years, prompting increasingly complex personal and professional ethical challenges. This Commentary focuses on those rising from donor conception and/or surrogacy. The profile of those seeking such treatments has changed to include growing numbers of same sex couples, single people, people who are transitioning or have done, people seeking posthumous use of gametes, and people using cross-border services. Alongside, awareness has grown of life-span implications, the impact of commercial DNA testing, and the need for 'later-life' support. Responses vary internationally and the time for debate is overdue. Who should provide fertility counselling and how? Should specialist qualifications, training, continuing professional development, and regulation be required? Should counsellors play a role in assessing suitability to parents? What aspects of different contractual arrangements and conflicts of interest need attention? Has the time come for counselling to be mandatory as part of pre-treatment pathways? What should be the relationship between fertility counsellors and multi-disciplinary clinic teams? How might fertility counsellors be represented nationally and internationally? What should be their relationship to 'later life' professional support? What place should professional knowledge hold in the evidence base?

The impact of the method of genetic identity disclosure on the donor conceived adult

Aim: 106 donor conceived people (DCP) responded to an anonymous survey study that examined the impact of the method of genetic identity disclosure and age at the time of the disclosure on their emotional wellbeing, familial relations, and perceptions of donor conception practices.Methods: Participants were asked to select the way in which they were informed they are DCP and the age group at which this occurred, and then were asked to select strongly agree, agree, neither agree or disagree, disagree, or strongly disagree in response to 26 statements that examined their perceptions of the topics listed above. Responses were grouped based on the age of genetic identity disclosure and the method of genetic identity disclosure, then numerically compared by assigning each type of response a number. Statistical analysis using repeatedmeasures ANOVA was performed to identify differences among these factors.Results: This analysis revealed that most participants 18 ≥ years and most participants who discovered their genetic identity through means other than through their parent(s) had worse emotional wellbeing and familial relations. However, most participants among all categories had a negative perception of donor conception practices.Conclusion: Continued work is needed to understand and support the growing DCP population.

OUP accepted manuscript

STUDY QUESTION

What information and support should be offered to donors, intended parents and donor-conceived people, in general and in consideration of the availability of direct-to-consumer genetic testing and matching services?

SUMMARY ANSWER

For donors, intended parents and donor-conceived offspring, recommendations are made that cover information needs and informed consent, psychosocial implications and disclosure.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Trends indicate that the use of donor-assisted conception is growing and guidance is needed to help these recipients/intended parents, the donors and offspring, navigate the rapidly changing environment in which donor-assisted conception takes place.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

A working group (WG) collaborated on writing recommendations based, where available, on evidence collected from a literature search and expert opinion. Draft recommendations were published for stakeholder review and adapted where relevant based on the comments received.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Papers retrieved from PUBMED were included from 1 January 2014 up to 31 August 2020, focusing on studies published since direct-to-consumer genetic testing has become more widespread and accessible. The current paper is limited to reproductive donation performed in medically assisted reproduction (MAR) centres (and gamete banks): donation outside the medical context was not considered.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

In total, 32 recommendations were made for information provision and support to donors, 32 for intended parents and 27 for donor-conceived offspring requesting information/support.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The available evidence in the area of reproductive donation is limited and diverse with regards to the context and types of donation. General conclusions and recommendations are largely based on expert opinion and may need to be adapted in light of future research.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

These recommendations provide guidance to MAR centres and gamete banks on good practice in information provision and support but should also be considered by regulatory bodies and policymakers at a national and international level to guide regulatory and legislative efforts towards the protection of donors and donor-conceived offspring.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

The development of this good practice paper was funded by European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), covering expenses associated with the WG meetings, the literature searches and dissemination. The WG members did not receive any payment. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

DISCLAIMER

This document represents the views of ESHRE, which are the result of consensus between the relevant ESHRE stakeholders and where relevant based on the scientific evidence available at the time of preparation.

The recommendations should be used for informational and educational purposes. They should not be interpreted as setting a standard of care, or be deemed inclusive of all proper methods of care nor exclusive of other methods of care reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. They do not replace the need for application of clinical judgement to each individual presentation, nor variations based on locality and facility type.

^†ESHRE pages content is not externally peer reviewed. The manuscript has been approved by the Executive Committee of ESHRE.

'Genes versus children': if the goal is parenthood, are we using the optimal approach?

First medical contact for couples trying for a child will usually emphasise the array of assistance available to ‘help them have their own child’, usually with options involving ART, after diagnosis. For many poorer prognosis couples, this means repetitive unsuccessful cycles of invasive and stressful treatment. What is sometimes lost at this stage is a reflection on the likelihood of success of different options, which may lead patients to focus on hoping for their own ‘genetic’ progeny, but failing to consider the alternative and potentially more successful other options, including donation and adoption, for achieving parenthood of a child. Factors not only such as female age but also advanced requirements such as preimplantation genetic testing or even mitochondrial replacement therapies all have reduced chances of success but further tend to reinforce the importance of a genetic link. The financial, physical and psychosocial burden associated with cumulative failure also lead to a higher probability of dropout and consequently an even higher probability of remaining in involuntary childlessness. We advocate formulation of a detailed roadmap for discussion of parenthood, with reference explanation to genetics and epigenetics, which gives due consideration to the psychological effects from the beginning to end of the treatment process, alongside a balanced consideration of the likelihood of treatment success and discussion of other options. Only when we provide patients with the service of a clear and transparent discussion of these matters, we will really realise the true potential of our field, which may then be better considered as assisted families.

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.

[Anonymity of gamete donation and genetic testing]

Development of genetic testing direct-to-consumer (DTC) for recreational purposes, although prohibited in France, is a real challenge to the current practice of gamete donation. Indeed, anonymity is a fundamental principle contributing to the ethics of donation. This principle is weakened due to the availability to the general public of these tests on the Internet. Several thousands of people are conceived by gamete donation worldwide, some of whom do not know how they were conceived. Gamete donors should be informed that their anonymity is no longer guaranteed, as they can be found by homologies of their DNA, or that of a parent or a child, potentially available in databases. Thus, adults conceived by gamete donation but not informed by their parents can discover their way of conception. Recipients of gamete donation should also be informed that their child's DNA will establish the biological discrepancy and they should be encouraged to disclose the conception to their child. Several countries now allow children conceived by donation to obtain donor's identity. In France, the Bioethics Law is currently being finalized and will now allow access to donor's identity for people conceived by gamete donation.

Conceived Through Rape/Incest? Adoptive Parents' Experiences Managing Uncertainty and Disclosure Surrounding their Children's Origins

Adoptive parents may be placed with children conceived under difficult circumstances, such as via rape or incest. At the same time, adoptive parents are generally encouraged to communicate openly with their children about their adoption stories and birth families. No research has examined the experiences of parents who adopt children who were conceived through rape or incest. This exploratory study examines how parents discuss their decision-making when adopting children conceived via rape or incest, how they manage varying levels of uncertainty about their children's origins, and whether and how they plan to disclose this information to children. The researchers used thematic analysis to examine the experiences of 11 couples (22 parents) interviewed at four time points after adopting children who were reportedly conceived via rape or incest. Findings revealed that even soon after adopting, parents discussed the need to eventually talk to their children about their conception circumstances. Parents generally struggled to determine how and when to disclose this information, particularly when they felt uncertain about the veracity of the conception stories they had been told. Some hoped to rely on professionals or birth mothers to guide them in these communications. Findings have implications for supporting adoptive families as they navigate the complexity of managing sensitive information and uncertainty when adopting children conceived through rape or incest. Practitioners should provide ongoing guidance to adoptive parents about how and when to disclose developmentally appropriate information to children about difficult conception circumstances.

Safety of Germline Genome Editing for Genetically Related "Future" Children as Perceived by Parents

The social acceptability of germline genome editing (GGE) depends on its perceived safety, as well as respect for reproductive autonomy. However, it is doubtful that prospective parents sufficiently understand the risks of GGE. In the future, the use of GGE in specific situations seems plausible, as it offers couples potential means to safeguard genetically related future children from a serious disease and overcome infertility due to a gene mutation. Should GGE fail, however, some couples may be obliged to abort affected fetuses, or give birth to adversely affected children, which would be a tragedy. Some children might develop diseases later in life due to overlooked off-target mutations. Compounding this, some parents are unlikely to inform their offspring about the details of conception, hampering necessary follow-up. Prospective parents, scientists and policy makers should carefully discuss the safety implications of GGE for genetically related future children.

Managing absence and presence of child-parent resemblance: a challenge for heterosexual couples following sperm donation

This qualitative interview study sought to gather and better understand heterosexual parents' experiences of managing resemblance and non-resemblance between child and parent in an identity-release donor programme. The study is part of the prospective longitudinal Swedish Study on Gamete Donation (SSGD), including all fertility clinics performing gamete donation in Sweden. A sample of participants in the SSGD, consisting of 30 heterosexual parents with children aged 7-8 years following identity-release sperm donation, participated in individual semi-structured interviews. This study concerns a secondary analysis of the interview data. The results show how donor-conceiving parents experience the presence and absence of child-parent resemblance, and how they navigate between the importance of genetic connectedness and of 'doing parenthood' through social interactions. The analysis resulted in three categories: 'resemblance through nature or nurture', 'non-resemblance brings the donor to the front' and 'feelings about and coping with resemblance talk'. The first two categories deal with the intrapersonal aspects of physical and non-physical resemblance, while the last category includes aspects of resemblance in relation to persons outside the core family. The presence or absence of parent-child resemblance regarding both physical and non-physical characteristics appears to constitute a considerable challenge for heterosexual couples with school-aged children following sperm donation.

"I want us to be a normal family": Toward an understanding of the functions of anonymity among U.S. oocyte donors and recipients

BACKGROUND

Anonymity remains the more common practice in gamete donations, but legislation prohibiting anonymity with a goal of protecting donor-conceived children's right to know their genetic origins is becoming more common. However, given the dearth of research investigating the function of anonymity for donors and recipients, it is unclear whether these policies will accomplish their goals. The aim of this study was to explore experiences with anonymity among oocyte donors and recipients who participated in an anonymous donor oocyte program and to understand the ways in which anonymity functions for them.

METHODS

Semistructured interviews were conducted with 50 women: 28 oocyte donors and 22 recipients who were recruited from an academic center for reproductive medicine in the United States.

RESULTS

Donors and recipients view anonymity both as a mechanism to protect the interests of all parties (recipients, donors, and donor-conceived children) and as a point of conflict. Specifically, three key areas were identified where both donors and recipients saw anonymity as having an important role: relieving anxieties about family structures and obligations; protecting their interests and those of donor-conceived children (while acknowledging where interests conflict); and managing the future.

CONCLUSION

As gamete donation increasingly moves away from the practice of anonymity, examining why anonymity matters to stakeholders will be helpful in devising strategies to successfully implement identity-release options.