When ‘sperm’ becomes ‘donor’: Transitions in parents’ views of the sperm donor

Abstract

Little is known about recipients' views of their sperm donor. This study aimed to examine the possible transitions or consistencies in donor sperm recipients' (DSRs') view on the sperm donor over time. A longitudinal qualitative study of 19 Belgian heterosexual DSRs was undertaken. Interviews took place with both partners of the couple during pregnancy, at birth and 1.5-2 years after birth, and were analysed using a grounded theory approach. Recipients who intended to disclose exhibited a transition in their awareness of the donor from being of minimal importance to one who was increasingly seen as part of their family narrative. This was partly triggered by the offspring's life, remarks about resemblance and the socio-cultural context. The perceived position of the donor changed for most recipients from a threatening rival to a 'distractor'. This change was supported by the emerging father-child bond and the confidence that stemmed from it. These observations were applicable to those recipients who intended to disclose their donor conception; for those recipients who intended not to disclose, little or no transition was observed. This study describes and analyses the transitions and consistencies in recipients' views of the donor over different stages of the family life-cycle (pregnancy, birth, toddler stage) and could help the fertility clinics tailor their counselling to the specific stages of parenthood.

‘It's a bit too much fathering this seed’: the meaning-making of the sperm donor in Italian lesbian mother families

“…As also noted by recent research with different family types (Blyth et al, 2010;Indekeu et al, 2014a;Zadeh et al, 2016), especially when child's physical traits do not resemble those of the biological parent, more and more curiosity about the donor and the relevance of his existence are triggered. In this sense, in lesbian mother families what in the first instance may be likely experienced as a 'missing part' (Ehrensaft, 2008), the 'donor as a ghost', gradually has to be negotiated in his absence (Donovan, 2000).…”

“…The balance between fears of intrusion and wishes for increased knowledge (Mitchell and Green, 2007) allows mothers to piece together the donor as a whole person and to acknowledge him as belonging to the child's history. In contrast, reactions of denial or reduction to the donor's sperm seemed to be a way of coping with these feelings and thoughts (Indekeu et al, 2014a).…”

“…It is often assumed that female-partnered mothers may have fewer difficulties with the involvement of the sperm donor than heterosexual counterparts, since they know from the start that they will need him to conceive a child (Indekeu et al, 2014a(Indekeu et al, , 2014bWyverkens et al, 2014). Their status as a donor conception family is 'socially visible' and thus they do not have to be concerned with the concept of the child having both a father and a donor (Scheib et al, 2003).…”

“…Wyverkens et al (2014) found that female-partnered mothers who conceived via anonymous donation questioned the donor as an exclusive concept. Indekeu et al (2014a) noted that the emerging emotional bond between the non-biological parent and the child and the increasing acknowledgement of the conceptual value of the donor as a person for the child 'resulted in a more relaxed approach to the contribution of the donor such that he became more accepted and integrated in their family narrative' (p. 275). Another possible reaction is that mothers 'minimize the intervention of the donor by picturing him as an anonymous sperm cell with no parental responsibilities whilst also representing him as the bearer of some of their children's features' (Vanfraussen et al, 2001(Vanfraussen et al, , p. 2024).…”

How do anonymous sperm donors signal credibility through their self-presentations?

“…Non-genetic parents and heterosexual couples have been typically found to be less willing to disclose the use of DI in any circumstances (Beeson et al, 2011;Brewaeys et al, 1997;Isaksson et al, 2012;Lalos et al, 2007;Shehab et al, 2008). Couples who planned to disclose to their offspring were concerned that the figure of the donor may threaten the position of the social father; however, this motif decreased when a strong father-child 'bond' existed (Indekeu et al, 2014).…”