Choosing identity-release sperm donors: the parents' perspective 13-18 years later

Abstract

Families were relatively open and positive about their use of DI and that their child could obtain the donor's identity. Disclosure did not appear to have a negative impact on the families, regardless of parental sexual orientation and relationship status.

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

“…The results from this study confirm those of other studies: where lesbian couples appear most inclined to disclose (Baetens and Brewaeys, 2001;Brewaeys et al, 2005;Freeman et al, 2009;Scheib et al, 2003) and that one of the documented reasons for not disclosing donor origins is the lack of information about the donor (Cook et al, 1995). As with the study of non-biological parents , where only nine non-biological parents expressed having no intention of ever disclosing to their child the nature of their conception, the current study found that only about 5.0% (83) of respondents had no intention of telling.…”

“…There was a marked difference between cohorts in initial preference for using an open-identity donor -a similarly higher proportion of single respondents and those in a lesbian relationship deliberately chose an open-identity donor than did respondents in a heterosexual relationship. This confirms the findings of Brewaeys et al (2005) and Scheib et al (2003). A majority of respondents who had used an anonymous donor indicated that they wished they had used an open-identity donor, and a majority of all respondents endorsed the rights of donor-conceived offspring to discover their donor's identity.…”

“…This is particularly relevant to the USA, due to the current lack of industry regulation. This study complements an investigation of nonbiological parents by Frith et al (2012) that examined the different experiences and perspectives of the male and female non-biological parent in the donor insemination family partnership and extends the work of Scheib et al (2003). It is unique in that it compares the experiences, perspectives and concerns of three cohorts of women who were the genetic mothers of children conceived using donor spermatozoa: single mothers, mothers in a heterosexual relationship and mothers in a lesbian relationship.…”

“…Previous research into the experiences of parents who have formed a family using donor conception has largely focused on anonymity and disclosure (Almack, 2006;Becker et al, 2005;Bos et al, 2003;Brewaeys et al, 1993;Burr, 2009;Cook et al, 1995;Donovan and Wilson, 2008;Gartrell et al, 2000;Grace et al, 2008;Haimes and Weiner, 2000;Nachtigall et al, 1997;Scheib et al, 2003;Shehab et al, 2008;Suter et al, 2008;Touroni and Coyle, 2002;Werner and Westersthål, 2008) and, more recently, on the experiences of these parents and their offspring with regard to searching for their donor and half-siblings (Blyth, 2012;Freeman et al, 2009;Jadva et al, 2010). Despite this volume of research, the experiences and concerns of the recipients of donor spermatozoa regarding how the sperm banking industry operates has not been thoroughly investigated.…”

Perspectives, experiences, and choices of parents of children conceived following oocyte donation

“…There is an emerging interest in identifying and making contact with gamete donors and donor siblings, both by the parents of donor-conceived children, and by donor-conceived persons themselves, although most of this research has focused on sperm rather than oocyte donation (see for example, Scheib et al, 2003;Scheib and Cushing, 2007;Scheib and Ruby, 2008;Freeman et al, 2009;Cushing, 2010;Mahlstedt et al, 2010;Beeson et al, 2011;Hertz and Mattes, 2011;Blyth, 2012a, b). This trend is also exemplified by the number of individuals registering with DSR and using its website and, specifically in relation to oocyte donation, by respondents to the present survey.…”