Donor-conceived Adults Research Articles

Producing sperm, egg and embryo donors’ pen portraits and other personal information for later use by donor offspring: an exploratory study of professional practices

This study considered professional input into collecting personalized donor information for later release to donor offspring. Existing studies report the importance of such information for identity completion, to satisfy curiosity, and to allay anxiety about genetic inheritance. The study used a three-pronged approach: a literature search of professional practices in this and related fields; key informant telephone interviews with donor-conceived adults, sperm and egg donors, and professionals and a postal survey of UK clinics’ practices and views. The literature revealed only one previous study, which suggested gendered approaches to pen portraits were used in commercial donor banks. Key informants agreed on the importance of information for offspring well-being and the need for support services in its compilation and on release. Donors reported inadequate professional assistance to date. The postal survey of clinics revealed variable practices in the process of acquiring and storing later life information and variable success in achieving its completion. Respondents identified factors that hinder completion (donor anxiety, lack of guidance, shortage of staff time) and factors that help (donor belief in the importance of later life information, staff belief, dedicated staff time). Further research, including intervention studies, is needed into the processes and skills involved in collecting later life information.

Who requests their sperm donor's identity? Analysis of donor-conceived adult requests at an open-identity program

OBJECTIVE: Open-identity donation offers adult offspring the option to obtain their donor's identity. We report findings from a study of planned information-releases to donor-conceived adults. DESIGN: Archival analysis; interviews. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using interview data from information-releases and archival data about program families, we addressed who wants their donor's identity, when and how long releases take, demographic predictors of making requests, and motivations for obtaining information. Analyses used chi-square tests. RESULTS: Since the first release 6 years ago, 37/142 (26.1%) eligible adults requested donor information. With adjustment for a 70% heterosexual-couple disclosure rate, about 30% of adults made requests. Once started, 77.8% obtained their donor's identity. Median time to complete the process was 28 days; 70% completed in 6 mos. Eligible offspring ranged from 18–25 years old, but median requesting age was within a month of turning 18. If urgency existed about getting information, we expected requests to be made at ages 18-19. Indeed among older requesters (20 yrs+), all but one requested information before age 20, suggesting there may be at least two groups of requesters: those who want information as soon as possible, and those who get it later in life. More women (56.8%) than men requested information, with gender predicting requests (X12=4.6, p< .05). Almost half of all requesting adults (48.6%) were raised by lesbian couples, 31.4% by single women and 20% by heterosexual couples, with adults from single-parent families predicting requests (X22=8.6, p<.05). Having two parents appeared to deter requests (X22=3.9, p<.05), perhaps from concern for coparents. But when adjusted for non-disclosure, family-structure effects weakened (p's>.1). With rates adjusted, information was requested by 34% of eligible adults raised by lesbian couples, 44% raised by single women and 20.6% raised by heterosexual couples. At least half of adults went on to contact and meet their donor, reflecting interviews at information-release. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest some urgency for wanting to know who the donor is among nearly one-third of adults. More women requested than men, similar to adoption. Adults with single parents were overrepresented among requesters, but effects weakened when adjusted for non-disclosure. Many adults met their donor and from initial reports, the experience has been overwhelmingly positive.

Families working it out: adolescents' views on communicating about donor-assisted conception

Prompted by legislation in Victoria, Australia, permitting gamete donors to seek identifying details of people conceived from their gametes, this research investigated the views of adolescents from the general population on how parents can best talk to their donor-conceived adolescent children about their conception. Qualitative interviews (six group discussions, n = two to six per group, and one individual interview) lasting c. 50 min with 25 secondary school students. Naïve adolescents had views largely consistent with those of donor-conceived adults, for example, urging parental honesty, adaptation to individual children, and family cohesion. They identified the social father as the parent while acknowledging the significance of genetic connection to the donor. A minority asserted a preference for non-disclosure; all said that, if disclosed, it should be by parents. This small study contributes to increasing understanding of communication within families about donor-assisted conception.

Using and not losing the messages from the adoption experience for donor-assisted conception

The debate about the information needs of donor-conceived people is reaching an important stage. The recent Government consultation about providing information on sperm, egg and embryo donors (Department of Health, 2001) has meant that the subject is receiving much public attention. More importantly, it is becoming increasingly evident that donorconceived people themselves are beginning to have a voice about their experience of not being able to access basic information about their genealogical heritage. Gollancz (2001) raised some pertinent issues about the rights and needs of donor-conceived people to have access to identifying information about their genetic parents. Recent research is also providing powerful messages about the information needs of donor-conceived people. For example, the study by Turner and Coyle (2000) of 16 donor-conceived adults between the ages of 26 and 55 asked about identity experience, including issues of secrecy and disclosure of their donor-conceived status, and also investigated the experience of trying to trace and search for a genetic father (the donor), the current perception of donor insemination and how families could manage openness versus secrecy. The findings identify many similarities between adopted and donor-conceived people. But in what ways is adoption similar to donor conception? And can donor conception learn anything from adoption? This paper will explore some of the relevant lessons learned from adoption to draw out some of the issues, experiences and dilemmas shared by adopted people, donor-conceived people and their families, using the findings of The Children's Society's research study.