Genetic databases and donor anonymity

Fertility stakeholders’ concerns regarding payment for egg and sperm donation in New Zealand and Australia

“…the donor-conceived person) (Daniels and Lewis, 1996;Daniels, 2000;Kalampalikis et al, 2012;Lee et al, 2017); and commodification of, and devaluation of, human life contrary to religious and cultural mores (Daniels, 2000;Graham et al, 2016;Lee et al, 2017). Given the advent of donor identity release practices in many jurisdictions and the endorsement of contemporary DNA technology, the prospects of maintaining donor anonymity are reduced, and the potential for donor-conceived people to trace and even contact their donors is thus increased (Crawshaw, 2018;Crawshaw and Daniels, 2019;Kennett, 2020). Within this context of possible contact between the donor and recipients/offspring, it becomes even more pertinent to address concerns regarding donor practices, including donation for financial reward, as how recipients and offspring make sense of the donors' motives may have some bearing upon their experiences and life narrative.…”

Truth, Proof, Sleuth: Trust in Direct-to-Consumer DNA Testing and Other Sources of Identity Information among Australian Donor-Conceived People

“…Few people could have predicted the rise in popularity of direct-to-consumer DNA testing and the associated consequences for those enmeshed in the practice of donor conception. While the threat of DNA testing to donor anonymity has been noted in the media since the mid 2000s (Motluk, 2005), over the last five years autosomal direct-to-consumer DNA testing has become more accessible and affordable, with more than 30 million users worldwide (Kennett et al, 2019). Since 2009, DNA testing companies have introduced features, such as 'relative finder ' (23andMe, 2009;Larmuseau, 2019), which 'match' users according to shared centiMorgans (units of genetic measurement) (Bettinger, 2020).…”