Disclosure of sperm donation: a comparison between solo mother and two-parent families with identifiable donors

Abstract

Disclosure of donor conception to children was compared between solo mother and two-parent families with children aged 4–8 years conceived since the removal of donor anonymity in the UK. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 31 heterosexual solo mothers and 47 heterosexual mothers with partners to investigate their decisions and experiences about identifiable donation and disclosure to their children. No significant difference was found in the proportion of mothers in each family type who had told their children about their donor conception (solo mothers 54.8%; partnered mothers 36.2%). Of those who had not told, a significantly higher proportion of solo mothers than partnered mothers intended to disclose (P < 0.05). Partnered mothers were more likely than solo mothers to feel neutral, ambivalent or negative about having used an identifiable donor (P < 0.05), and were less likely to consider children's knowledge of their genetic origins as extremely important (P < 0.05). These findings are relevant to provision of counselling services as it cannot be assumed that parents will tell their children about their origins or their entitlement to request the identity of their donor at the age of 18 years. Further qualitative research would increase understanding of solo mothers' attitudes towards disclosure.

What's Right About Knowing?

“…10 And, in another study comparing heterosexual-partnered mothers and single-parent mothers, the 'Partnered mothers were more likely than solo mothers to feel neutral, ambivalent or negative about having used an identifiable donor (P < 0.05), and were less likely to consider children's knowledge of their genetic origins as extremely important'. 11 Because heterosexual partnered women are becoming less likely to need sperm donors, the interests of solo mothers deserve more respect and attention. Of course, not all single mothers would choose identity-release donors.…”

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

“…Studies of parents’ disclosure practices following the introduction of identifiable donation in Sweden found both no evidence ( Gottlieb et al, 2000 ) and substantial evidence ( Isaksson et al, 2012 ) that parents using identifiable donors were more likely to disclose. In the UK, no significant increase in the rate of disclosure has been shown following the introduction of legislation mandating identifiable donation in 2005 ( Freeman et al, 2016 ). In Finland, a large retrospective study of 58% of all offspring conceived using sperm donation since 1990 indicated that the parents of offspring born since 2000 were more likely to disclose to their children than the parents of offspring born before this date ( Sälevaara et al, 2013 ).…”

Counsellors’ practices in donor sperm treatment

“…Families with children after DST have to deal with anxiety about the lack of genetic ties and with non-disclosure or disclosing the genetic origins of their child Haimes, 1998;Indekeu, D'Hooghe, Daniels, Dierckx, & Rober, 2014;Kirkman, 2003;McWhinnie, 2000). In several Western countries, donor-anonymity is forbidden and practices on disclosure have shifted from secrecy to openness (Freeman, Zadeh, Smith, & Golombok, 2016;Isaksson, Sydsj€ o, Skoog Svanberg, & Lampic, 2012;Readings, Blake, & Casey, 2011;S€ oderstr€ om-Anttila, S€ alevaara, & Suikkari, 2010). As parents are often uncertain about when and how to share donor-conception with their child, family and friends, how to consider the position of the donor and what to expect from possible future contact between their child and the donor, counselling on disclosure and possible future contact with the donor are of great value.…”

“…As parents are often uncertain about when and how to share donor-conception with their child, family and friends, how to consider the position of the donor and what to expect from possible future contact between their child and the donor, counselling on disclosure and possible future contact with the donor are of great value. Counselling is now advised as an integral part of DST (Cousineau & Domar, 2007;Daniels, Gillett, & Grace, 2009; ESHRE task force on Ethics and Law et al, 2007;Freeman et al, 2016;Greenfeld, 2008;Hammarberg, Carmichael, Tinney, & Mulder, 2008;Indekeu et al, 2013;Indekeu et al, 2014;Isaksson et al, 2012;McWhinnie, 2001). The Ethics Committee of the American Society of Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) has recommended that men and women applying for DST are not to be treated before being given the opportunity to receive specialist psychosocial counselling (ASRM, 2013).…”