The case for reframing known donation

Gilman, Leah; Nordqvist, Petra

doi:10.1080/14647273.2022.2145242

Cited by 3 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Existing research suggests that there are strategies available to recipients to manage risks or respond to difficult donor behaviour. Gilman and Nordqvist ( 5 ), for example, advise that while health risks are higher in OSD, “the use of [STI] testing can arguably reduce them to then a lower level than might be expected in a typical “natural” conception’ ( 8 ). Pennings also suggests that a recipient who finds donor behaviour unacceptable “should cancel the deal”, although he acknowledges that, “In reality, things may not be that simple” ( 8 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As of 1st April 2005, clinics have also been legally bound to offer only identity-release donation, whereby donor-conceived children are entitled to access limited information about their donor at age 16 years and more comprehensive personal details at age 18 years old ( 4 ). Other forms of donation, ranging from fully anonymous donation to co-parenting scenarios are not offered ( 5 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Online sperm donation (OSD) offers a broader spectrum of long-term donation arrangements and the opportunity to save money through home insemination rather than undertaking costly fertility procedures ( 5 ). Pennings also suggests that OSD de-medicalizes sperm donation and “increases the reproductive autonomy of women in countries in which access to donor spermatozoa is restricted, where rules are imposed that curtail the freedom to build one's family according to one's own values, or both” ( 8 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There have also been some safety concerns relating to “morally challenging” behaviour and the potential for abuse of recipients by donors ( 7 ). It should be noted, however, that conceiving a child with an intimate partner may carry the same health and safety risks, and that, while using a sperm bank may guarantee the absence of STIs, there is less reliability in terms of genetic testing ( 5 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some of these issues are mentioned briefly by other researchers when discussing OSD [see for example ( 5 , 8 )]. In particular, Jadva and colleagues ( 6 ) found that one third of recipients in their OSD study reported disadvantages to this conception route and, of this number, 40% referred to the existence of “dishonest” donors.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Acceptance and rejection of “morally challenging” behaviour in online sperm donation communities: narrative interviews with recipients and donors

Forshall,

Jones,

Turner-Moore

2024

Front. Reprod. Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionOnline sperm donation allows those hoping to conceive a baby (“recipients”) to meet prospective sperm donors online, via “connection” websites or social media. These sites offer some advantages to clinical donation (including lower costs and greater choice over donation arrangements) but previous research has suggested that these sites may also pose risks and challenges to those who use them. Therefore, the aim of this exploratory research was to better understand online sperm donation communities and the experiences of both recipients and donors, particularly with respect to situations that could be “morally challenging” or involve harm.MethodsThree prolific donors and five recipients were interviewed using an in-depth narrative approach. Carol Gilligan's Listening Guide was employed to analyse the data.ResultsThe findings demonstrated that the donors sought to find ways to maintain autonomy in their donating practices and were concerned about the character and parenting abilities of recipients, as well as the potential for recipients to make unwarranted complaints. The recipients were concerned about their safety and finding a donor they could trust, discussing issues relating to donor “dishonesty”, online abuse, and a lack of support from connection sites and related authorities. Both donors and recipients identified “morally challenging” behaviour relating to donor anonymity (donor use of fake online profiles or aliases) and the sexual motivations or (mis)conduct of some donors. The participants each discussed the ways in which they managed perceived risks.DiscussionThe degree to which the participants voiced their acceptance or rejection of challenging behaviour in online sperm donation communities varied across and within participants, highlighting the complexity of the way in which people interact in this environment. Further research is required to understand how this form of sperm donation can be as safe and supportive as possible, while also respecting the importance to donors and recipients of autonomy and choice when making donation arrangements.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Acceptance and rejection of “morally challenging” behaviour in online sperm donation communities: narrative interviews with recipients and donors

Forshall,

Jones,

Turner-Moore

2024

Front. Reprod. Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Extended families? Contact expectations and experiences of egg donors donating to previously unknown recipients

Goedeke,

Gamble,

Thurlow

2023

Human Fertility

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Embodied sociotechnical imaginaries: how donor-conceived people imagine identity, family and reprodigital futures beyond regulation

Newton,

Drysdale,

Newman

2024

Front. Glob. Womens Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sociological scholarship has begun to explore imaginaries of family and reproduction, yet less work has focused on the emerging social form of the donor family. In this article, we consider the embodied sociotechnical imaginaries of donor-conceived people, exploring their reflections, judgements, hopes, and predictions regarding donor conception. Combining reflexive thematic analysis of free-text survey responses from sperm donor-conceived (n = 90) and egg donor-conceived (n = 1) and data from semi-structured interviews with sperm donor-conceived people (n = 28), conceived in both clinical and non-clinical contexts in Australia, we analyse donor-conceived people's imaginings of family, identity, and the practice of donor conception in the digital age. Our analysis centres the donor-conceived body that imagines, and in doing so, highlights the entanglements of reproductive and digital technologies, and the humans and institutions that drive their uptake. We argue that leveraging the imaginative and political capacities of donor-conceived people is a productive approach that illuminates possible (re)directions of the assisted reproduction industry as well as illustrating potential policy futures.

show abstract

The case for reframing known donation

Cited by 3 publications

References 29 publications

Acceptance and rejection of “morally challenging” behaviour in online sperm donation communities: narrative interviews with recipients and donors

Acceptance and rejection of “morally challenging” behaviour in online sperm donation communities: narrative interviews with recipients and donors

Extended families? Contact expectations and experiences of egg donors donating to previously unknown recipients

Embodied sociotechnical imaginaries: how donor-conceived people imagine identity, family and reprodigital futures beyond regulation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About