Fear, fascination and the sperm donor as 'abjection' in interviews with heterosexual recipients of donor insemination

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

'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.

A Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies Investigating Motives and Experiences of Recipients of Anonymous Gamete Donation

The decision to use an anonymous gamete donation in fertility treatment could have significant long-term psychological and social effects for all stakeholders involved. In light of the growing recognition of donor-conceived children's right to know their genetic parentage, this entails profound ethical implications. This review aims to carve out the full spectrum of recipients' motives and experiences related to donor anonymity which could serve as an analytical framework for future ethical and sociological research on issues of donor anonymity. This review was conducted following a seven-step approach for systematic reviews of empirical bioethics literature. The characteristics and quality of the studies included in this review were reported. Data analysis was conducted using qualitative content analysis and was informed by sociological functionalist theorizations of ignorance. The 53 studies selected showed a diverse spectrum of characteristics concerning date and country of study, methodology, family type of participants, sample size, and the timing of data collection in relation to the stage of treatment. A total of 22 categories of motives and experiences of recipients concerning donor anonymity were identified inductively and grouped into five main categories. Donor anonymity was identified as a eufunctional form of ignorance, by which the recipients experienced or intended to control, regulate, or protect inter-stakeholder relations. Interpreting recipients' motives and experiences concerning donor anonymity as a form of ignorance directed toward particular stakeholders helps reframe the discourse on donor anonymity. It is a fruitful approach that can be refined further and applied in future research. This review identified possible directions for future investigations on motives for donor anonymity: the need for more thorough inquiries into the change in recipients' preferences over time, such as in the form of longitudinal studies and research on the perspective of non-biological parents.

Choosing genes without jeans: do evolutionary psychological mechanisms have an impact on thinking distortions in sperm donor preferences among heterosexual sperm recipients?

The objective of the project was to compare the importance of traits desired in a life partner to traits desired in a sperm donor. A survey was distributed via internet support groups to women undergoing donor insemination and the questionnaire consisted of 35 traits of a desired life partner and of a desired sperm donor. The respondents comprised 278 unmarried childless heterosexual women over 38 years old undergoing donor insemination treatments. The 35 traits of a desired life partner and a desired sperm donor were grouped by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) into four factors: (i) personality; (ii) physical appearance; (iii) genes and health; and (iv) socio-economic status. Paired-sample t-tests showed that patients attached significantly greater importance to social status, personality, and physical appearance in a desired life partner than to those traits in a desired sperm donor. No differences were found regarding the genetic quality of the desired life partner versus the sperm donor. These findings contribute to the understanding of fertility patients' preferences in sperm donors.

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.

Toxic money or paid altruism: the meaning of payments for identity-release gamete donors

Public discourses commonly frame gamete, organ and other forms of bodily donation as altruistic 'gifts'. However, despite on-going debates about the ethics of payments to donors, few studies have examined the views of donors themselves regarding the meaning of payments and their compatibility (or not) with understandings of these practices as gifts. This article addresses this issue, analysing 24 in-depth interviews with UK identity-release gamete donors. It was crucial to all participants that their donation be viewed as fundamentally other-oriented, motivated by the desire to help others. However, whilst egg donors often accommodated payment within this narrative, male participants explained that any money would taint the gift they had given. I argue that sperm donors faced particular challenges to incorporating payment within a gift narrative for two key reasons: first, sperm donors relied on a discourse of 'pure altruism', including absolute opposition between gifts and market exchange, in order to present their donation as other-oriented. In contrast, egg donors were also able to mobilise a discourse of relational giving to present their donations as a personal gift. Second, according to a continued stereotype of sperm donors as financially motivated students, their payments have already been culturally earmarked as side-line earnings.

Sperm donor regulation and disclosure intentions: Results from a nationwide multi-centre study in France

Gamete donation in Europe is not regulated by a common legal framework. Different laws regarding donor anonymity and remuneration exist in different countries. In France, gamete donation is characterized by a stable legal framework - the existing system of anonymous and non-remunerated donation remained unchanged following a period of public and parliamentary debate in 2011 - but little evidence is available concerning recipients' views and experiences of gamete donation. This article describes findings from a questionnaire completed individually by 714 heterosexual couple members undergoing a donor conception procedure at one of 20 national fertility centres in France. Participants were invited to report their attitudes towards the French legal framework, their perceptions of the anonymous donor, and their intentions to disclose donor conception to their child and to other people. The majority of respondents (93%) approved of the current legal framework. Participants indicated that they thought about the sperm donor in ways that emphasized his act of donation without describing him as a specific individual. A majority (71%) also stated that they intended to tell their child about their donor conception. Given that this is the largest nationwide study of French recipients of donor sperm, the findings make an important contribution to the research evidence currently available about prospective parents' perspectives in the increasingly uncommon context of donor anonymity in Europe.

The Meaning of the Sperm Donor for Heterosexual Couples: Confirming the Position of the Father

In the literature, relatively little attention has been paid to the meaning of donor involvement in the intimate couple dyad. The current study aimed to enrich our understanding of couples' meaning-making regarding the anonymous sperm donor and how they dealt with the donor involvement. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with nine couples, who had at least one child conceived through sperm donation. Our thematic analysis showed that the donor conception was seen as a different path to create a normal family. Once the family was formed, most couples avoided talking about the donor because it was perceived as disrupting men's growing confidence in their position as father. Participants tried to confirm the position of the father to protect the family relationships. Uncertainties about how they were perceived as parents showed the continuing dominance of genetic ties within our social discourse. Participants also dealt with reminders of the donor in their daily life. Overall, they tried to manage the space taken up by the donor and to protect the position of the father. We relate our findings to literature on topic avoidance and shared obliviousness in families. For counseling practice, it could be useful to explore couples' meaning-making about the donor as this seemed to serve family functioning.

Semen Arousal: Its Prevalence, Relationship to HIV Risk Practices, and Predictors among Men Using the Internet to Find Male Partners for Unprotected Sex

Purpose

This paper examines the extent to which men who use the Internet to find other men for unprotected sex are aroused by semen. It also looks at the relationship between semen arousal and involvement in HIV risk practices, and the factors associated with higher levels of semen arousal.

Methods

332 men who used any of 16 websites targeting unprotected sex completed 90-minute telephone interviews. Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected. A random sampling strategy was used. Semen arousal was assessed by four questions asking men how much they were turned on by the way that semen smelled, tasted, looked, and felt.

Results

65.1 % of the men found at least one sensory aspect of semen to be "fairly" or "very" arousing, compared to 10.2% being "not very" or "not at all" aroused by all four sensory aspects of semen. Multivariate analysis revealed that semen arousal was related to greater involvement in HIV risk practices, even when the impact of other salient factors such as demographic characteristics, HIV serostatus, and psychological functioning was taken into account. Five factors were found to underlie greater levels of semen arousal: not being African American, self-identification as a sexual "bottom," being better educated, being HIV-positive, and being more depressed.

Conclusions

Being aroused by the sensory aspects of giving or receiving semen is commonplace amongst men in this high-risk population. Semen arousal was related closely to involvement in risk practices, indicating a need for HIV intervention programs to address this phenomenon in this population.

Absence or presence? Complexities in the donor narratives of single mothers using sperm donation

STUDY QUESTION

How do single mothers who have conceived a child via anonymous or identity-release sperm donation represent the donor?

SUMMARY ANSWER

While the majority of mothers described their anonymous and identity-release donors as symbolically significant to their families, others were more likely to emphasize that their lack of information limited their thoughts about him.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

There is limited understanding of the factors that impact upon how single mothers represent the donor, and whether or not they are determined by specific donor programmes (anonymous or identity-release).

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

Qualitative interviews were conducted with 46 women who had treatment at a UK licensed fertility clinic during the years 2003–2009. Twenty mothers (43%) had used an anonymous donor, and 26 (57%) had used an identity-release donor.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Among the 46 mothers interviewed, all had at least one child conceived via donor insemination who was between the ages of 4 and 9 years. Mothers were heterosexual and were currently without a live-in and/or long-term partner. Interview data were analysed qualitatively according to the principles of thematic analysis.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Findings indicated marked diversity in single mothers' representations of the donor. Most (n = 27) mothers talked about the donor as symbolically significant to family life and were likely to describe the donor as (i) a gift-giver, (ii) a gene-giver and (iii) a potential partner. Others (n = 16) talked about the donor as (i) unknown, (ii) part of a process and (iii) out of sight and out of mind. There were mothers with anonymous and identity-release donors in each group. Several mothers explained that their feelings about the donor had changed over time.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

All mothers conceived at a licensed fertility clinic in the UK. Findings are limited to individuals willing and able to take part in research on donor conception.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The study offers greater insight into the factors influencing the donor narratives produced in single-mother families. It has implications for the counselling and treatment of single women seeking fertility treatment with donor gametes in both anonymous and identity-release programmes. Given that the number of clinics offering identity-release programmes worldwide seems to be increasing, the finding that single women may have varying preferences with regard to donor type, and varying interest levels with regard to donor information, is important. It is recommended that clinicians and other fertility clinic staff guard against making assumptions about such preferences and any thoughts and feelings about the donor or donor information on the basis of marital status.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This study was funded by the Wellcome Trust [097857/Z/11/Z]. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Experiences of Family Relationships Among Donor-Conceived Families: A Meta-Ethnography

In this qualitative evidence synthesis, we explore how family relationships are experienced by parents who used gamete donation to conceive. We systematically searched four databases (PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and ProQuest) for literature related to this topic and retrieved 25 studies. Through the analysis of the qualitative studies, a comprehensive synthesis and framework was constructed. Following the meta-ethnography approach of Noblit and Hare, four main themes were identified: (a) balancing the importance of genetic and social ties, (b) normalizing and legitimizing the family, (c) building strong family ties, and (d) minimizing the role of the donor. Underlying these four main themes, a sense of being "different" and "similar" at the same time was apparent. Findings are discussed in terms of their implications for studying and counseling donor-conceived families.

When 'sperm' becomes 'donor': transitions in parents' views of the sperm donor

Abstract Little is known about recipients' views of their sperm donor. This study aimed to examine the possible transitions or consistencies in donor sperm recipients' (DSRs') view on the sperm donor over time. A longitudinal qualitative study of 19 Belgian heterosexual DSRs was undertaken. Interviews took place with both partners of the couple during pregnancy, at birth and 1.5-2 years after birth, and were analysed using a grounded theory approach. Recipients who intended to disclose exhibited a transition in their awareness of the donor from being of minimal importance to one who was increasingly seen as part of their family narrative. This was partly triggered by the offspring's life, remarks about resemblance and the socio-cultural context. The perceived position of the donor changed for most recipients from a threatening rival to a 'distractor'. This change was supported by the emerging father-child bond and the confidence that stemmed from it. These observations were applicable to those recipients who intended to disclose their donor conception; for those recipients who intended not to disclose, little or no transition was observed. This study describes and analyses the transitions and consistencies in recipients' views of the donor over different stages of the family life-cycle (pregnancy, birth, toddler stage) and could help the fertility clinics tailor their counselling to the specific stages of parenthood.

Beyond sperm cells: a qualitative study on constructed meanings of the sperm donor in lesbian families

STUDY QUESTION

What meanings do lesbian couples construct regarding their sperm donor?

SUMMARY ANSWER

For some parents, the donor was increasingly presented as a person, whereas for other parents, the donor was seen as an instrument from the moment they received the sperm donation.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Few studies specifically focus on how lesbian couples deal with the issue of third-party anonymous gamete donation. It is often assumed that they have fewer difficulties than heterosexual couples with the involvement of a male procreator, since their status as a donor conception family is 'socially visible' and there is no social father who fears exclusion.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 lesbian couples (20 participants), recruited via the Ghent University Hospital. All couples had at least one child, conceived through anonymous donor insemination, between 7 and 10 years old.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Within the data corpus, a particular data set was analyzed where couples referred to their donor and his position in their family. Step-by-step inductive thematic analysis was performed resulting in themes that are grounded in the data. All phases of the analysis were followed by team discussion.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

This study reveals different donor constructs, indicating different ways of dealing with the third-party involvement in the family. Some parents diminish the role of the donor throughout family life and continue to present him as an instrument: something they needed in order to become parents. Others show an increasing interest in the donor as the children mature, which results in a more personalized account of the donor.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

In our qualitative cross-sectional study, we collected retrospectively constructed stories. Longitudinal qualitative and quantitative research is required to allow for an extrapolation of the conclusions made.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

This study shows how the concept of the donor is constructed within lesbian families and how it is challenged by the child's developing personality and features. When counseling prospective parents, it could therefore be useful to discuss the concept of the anonymous donor beyond the conception phase.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

The project was funded by the Research Fund of Ghent University, Belgium. There are no competing interests.

A survey of 1700 women who formed their families using donor spermatozoa

This paper reports the results of an online survey of 1700 recipients of donor spermatozoa conducted by the Donor Sibling Registry, aiming to understand the perspectives of respondents who had used donor spermatozoa. The survey examined: choice of sperm bank and donor; reporting of births and genetic disorders; disclosure; contact with donor and half-siblings; regulation of sperm donor activity and genetic testing; and access to medical information. The respondents formed three groups: single women; women in a same-sex relationship; and women in a heterosexual relationship. Some differences between the three cohorts were observed: preinsemination counselling; acceptance of donors without medical records or with chronic or late-onset diseases; awareness of choice of bank and type of donor; and views on the right of offspring to know their genetic origins. However, important areas of common ground were identified: the wish by those who had used an anonymous donor that they had used an open-identity donor; support for, and willingness to pay for, comprehensive genetic testing of donors; and desire for access to their donor's family health information. The implications of these results for policies concerning the use and management of donor spermatozoa will be discussed. This paper reports the results of a survey of 1700 women who used donor spermatozoa to conceive a child. The survey considers their views on the following areas: choice of sperm bank and donor; reporting of births and genetic disorders; disclosure; contact with donor and half-siblings; regulation of sperm donor activity and genetic testing; and access to medical information. This was an online survey was designed and conducted by the Donor Sibling Registry (DSR), a US-based non-profit organization that supports donor sperm recipients, donors and donor-conceived people. The survey aimed to understand the experiences, perspectives and concerns of women who had used donor spermatozoa. The respondents formed three groups: single women; women in a same sex relationship; and women in a heterosexual relationship. Some differences between the three groups were observed: preinsemination counselling; acceptance of donors without medical records or with chronic or late-onset diseases; awareness of choice of bank and type of donor; and the right of offspring to know their genetic origins. However, despite these differences, important areas of common ground were identified: the wish by those who had used an anonymous donor that they had used an open-identity donor; support for, and a willingness to pay for, comprehensive genetic testing of donors; and desire for access to their donor's family health information. The implications of these results for policies concerning the use and management of donor spermatozoa will be discussed.

The right to know your genetic parents: from open-identity gamete donation to routine paternity testing

Over the years a number of countries have abolished anonymous gamete donation and shifted toward open-identity policies. Donor-conceived children are said to have a fundamental "right to know" the identity of their donor. In this article, we trace the arguments that underlie this claim and question its implications. We argue that, given the status attributed to the right to know one's gamete donor, it would be discriminatory not to extend this right to naturally conceived children with misattributed paternity. One way to facilitate this would be through routine paternity testing at birth. While this proposal is likely to raise concerns about the conflicting interests and rights of other people involved, we show that similar concerns apply to the context of open-identity gamete donation. Unless one can identify a rational basis for treating the two groups differently, one's stance toward both cases should be the same.

Choreographies of sperm donations: dilemmas of intimacy in lesbian couple donor conception

Assisted conception involving donor insemination challenges cultural idioms of parenthood and family; there is now a growing body of work exploring how women and couples negotiate becoming a family in this way. But sperm donation also raises questions on the more intimate levels of sex, sexuality and sexual bodies, and these have received little sustained attention in the literature. Lesbian couples in the U.K. increasingly negotiate access to medicalised donor insemination, but many also conceive in informal arrangements with donors where they themselves negotiate proximity and contact with donors when retrieving donor sperm. I explore in this paper how lesbian couples manage and perceive sperm donations, how they seek to negotiate their intimate, sexual and bodily overtones, and how the medical and non-medical settings enable them to do this in different ways. I draw on empirical data from an interview study conducted from 2006 to 2009 in England and Wales comprising 25 lesbian couples. I suggest that sperm donation raises dilemmas of intimacy for lesbian couples, and that couples try to resolve such dilemmas by carefully and intentionally choreographing donation events through managing patterns of movement and action. The different institutional, medical and regulatory frameworks governing clinical and non-clinical sperm donation shape that management in significant and different ways. I argue that sperm donation choreographies enable couples to negotiate the private, sexual and intimate tensions surrounding sperm donations, and also the subjectivity of the sperm donor.

Mating by proxy: a novel perspective to donor conception

How single, partnered lesbian, and partnered heterosexual women undertaking donor insemination rate the importance of donor characteristics is explored in the context of Trivers's parental investment theory. Consistent with this theory, single women placed higher value on biographical traits reflective of the donor's level of potential resources (occupation, hobbies, age) and good character compared with either partnered lesbian or heterosexual women.

'Dealing with sperm': comparing lesbians' clinical and non-clinical donor conception processes

A growing body of literature investigates heterosexual donor conception and there is now also a small body of work which investigates the experiences of single women and lesbian couples. Both of these focus on a clinical setting. Women, notably single and lesbians, also undertake non-clinical donor conception, and insufficient consideration has been paid to these self-arranged reproductive practices, and how they may compare with the clinical ones. Seeking to fill this gap, this paper explores women's experiences of accessing donor sperm inside and outside reproductive health clinics by drawing on a qualitative interview study with 25 lesbian couples in England and Wales with experiences of jointly pursuing donor conception. The paper explores the differences embedded in the two conception routes with regard to donor recruitment, access to donor sperm over time, space and the management of sperm as a bodily fluid. Utilising the framework of 'ontological choreography' developed by Thompson (2005), as well as Douglas's (1966) work around bodies, dirt and disgust, the paper argues that the clinic functions as a containment for legal as well as practical and bodily dimensions of donor conception, and this in turn shapes practices and perceptions of self-arranged conception.

The long path to pregnancy: early experience with dual anonymous gamete donation in a European in vitro fertilisation referral centre

Background

This investigation describes features of patients undergoing in vitro fertilisation (IVF) and embryo transfer (ET) where both gametes were obtained from anonymous donors.

Methods

Gamete unsuitability or loss was confirmed in both members of seven otherwise healthy couples presenting for reproductive endocrinology consultation over a 12-month interval in Ireland. IVF was undertaken with fresh oocytes provided by anonymous donors in Ukraine; frozen sperm (anonymous donor) was obtained from a licensed tissue establishment. For recipients, saline-enhanced sonography was used to assess intrauterine contour with endometrial preparation via transdermal estrogen.

Results

Among commissioning couples, mean±SD female and male age was 41.9 ± 3.7 and 44.6 ± 3.5 yrs, respectively. During this period, female age for non dual anonymous gamete donation IVF patients was 37.9 ± 3 yrs (p < 0.001). Infertility duration was ≥3 yrs for couples enrolling in dual gamete donation, and each had ≥2 prior failed fertility treatments using native oocytes. All seven recipient couples proceeded to embryo transfer, although one patient had two transfers. Clinical pregnancy was achieved for 5/7 (71.4%) patients. Non-transferred cryopreserved embryos were available for all seven couples.

Conclusions

Mean age of females undergoing dual anonymous donor gamete donation with IVF is significantly higher than the background IVF patient population. Even when neither partner is able to contribute any gametes for IVF, the clinical pregnancy rate per transfer can be satisfactory if both anonymous egg and sperm donation are used concurrently. Our report emphasises the role of pre-treatment counselling in dual anonymous gamete donation, and presents a coordinated screening and treatment approach in IVF where this option may be contemplated.

To name or not to name? An overview of the social and ethical issues raised by removing anonymity from sperm donors

The aim of this paper is to focus on the ethical issues raised by the removal of anonymity from sperm donors. The increasing currency of a 'right to genetic truth' is clearly visible in the drive to revise the legislation on donor anonymity in Western and European countries. The ethical debate is polarized between the 'right to privacy' of the donor or parent and the 'right to know' of the prospective child. However, it is evident that religious, social and cultural attitudes have an overarching impact on attitudes towards sperm donation generally and anonymity specifically. In Asian countries, the social and cultural heritage is hugely diverse and different from those of the West. This review considers the research exploring the complexity of ethical issues informing this debate, and argues that parent's decisions to reveal donor insemination origins to their children are highly complex and relate to a range of social and cultural attitudes that have not been addressed within the policy to remove anonymity from sperm donors.

Disclosure of donor conception in single-mother families: views and concerns

BACKGROUND

Despite the prevalence of donor conception and the worldwide trend towards openness, there has been little research on whether parents do disclose the nature of the conception to their donor-conceived children. This analysis focuses on whether and how older Israeli single mothers disclose to their children that were conceived using a donor and whether the donor conception causes concern for them.

METHODS

Sixty-two single mothers of donor-conceived children in Israel were asked whether they would like to know the identity of the sperm donor; whether they would like their children to know the identity of the sperm donor when reaching the age of 18, whether they disclosed the circumstances of conception to their children or intend to do so in the future; and whether the sperm donation causes concern to them.

RESULTS

The mothers were divided on whether they wanted to know the identity of the sperm donor. However, less than one-fifth of them did not want their children to have identifying information about the genetic father at the age of 18. About two-thirds of the mothers had not yet disclosed the donor conception to their children but intended to do so in the future. A total of 77.4% of the mothers reported being concerned about the donor conception: for the psychosocial development of the child, fear of genetic disorders, fear of incest and lack of certainty of access to genetic information when needed.

CONCLUSIONS

The tendency to postpone the disclosure reveals the difficulty of these mothers in finding the appropriate way of sharing the information about the conception with their children. Given the importance attached to the age of disclosure and the mothers' concern for the psychosocial development of their children, more professional counselling in this area is warranted.