Ethical and legal issues

Anonymityedit

Anonymous sperm donation occurs under the condition that recipients and offspring will never learn the identity of the donor. A non-anonymous donor, however, will disclose his identity to recipients. A donor who makes a non-anonymous sperm donation is termed a known donor, an open identity donor, or an identity release donor.

Non-anonymous sperm donors are, to a substantially higher degree, driven by altruistic motives for their donations.

Even in the case of anonymous donation, some information about the donor may be released to recipients at the time of treatment. Limited donor information includes height, weight, eye, skin and hair colour. In Sweden, this is the extent of disclosed information. In the US, however, additional information may be given, such as a comprehensive biography and sound/video samples.

Several jurisdictions (e.g., Sweden, Norway, the Netherlands, Britain, Switzerland, Australia and New Zealand, and others) only allow non-anonymous sperm donation. This is generally based on the principle that a child has a right to know his or her biological origins. In 2013, a German court precedent was set based on a case brought by a 21-year-old woman. Generally, these jurisdictions require sperm banks to keep up-to-date records and to release identifying information about the donor to his offspring after they reach a certain age (15–18). See Sperm donation laws by country.

Attitudes towards anonymityedit

For most sperm recipients, anonymity of the donor is not of major importance at the obtainment or tryer-stage. Anonymous sperm is often less expensive. Another reason that recipients choose anonymous donors is concern about the role that the donor or the child may want the donor to play in the child's life. Sperm recipients may prefer a non-anonymous donor if they anticipate disclosing donor conception to their child and anticipate the child's desire to seek more information about their donor in the future. A Dutch study found that lesbian couples are significantly more likely (98%) to choose non-anonymous donors than heterosexual couples (63%). Of the heterosexual couples that opted for anonymous donation, 83% intended never to inform their child of their conception via sperm donation.

For children conceived by an anonymous donor, the impossibility of contacting a biological father or the inability to find information about him can potentially be psychologically burdensome. One study estimated that approximately 67% of adolescent donor conceived children with an identity-release donor plan to contact him when they turn 18.

Among donors and potential donorsedit

Among donors, a systematic review of 29 studies from nine countries concluded that 20–50% of donors would still be willing to donate even if anonymity could not be guaranteed. Between 40 and 97% of donors agree to release non-identifying information such as physical characteristics and level of education. The proportion of actual donors wishing for contact with their offspring varies between 10 and 88%. Most donors are not open to contact with offspring, although more open attitudes are observed among single and homosexual donors. About half of donors feel that degree of involvement should be decided by the intended parents. Some of the donors prefer contact with offspring in a non-visible way, such as where the child can ask questions but the donor will not reveal his identity. One study recruited donors through the Donor Sibling Registry who wanted contact with offspring or who had already made contact with offspring. It resulted that none of the donors said that there was "no relationship", a third of donors felt it was a special relationship, almost like a very good friend, and a quarter felt it was merely a genetic bond and nothing more. Fifteen percent of actual donors considered offspring to be "their own children". On the whole, donors feel that the first step towards contact should come from offspring rather than parents or the donor himself. Some even say that it is the moral responsibility of the donor not to seek contact with offspring.

The same review indicated that up to 37% of donors reported changes in their attitude towards anonymity before and after donation, with one in four being prepared to be more open about themselves after the donation than before (as a "potential donor"). Among potential donors, 30–46% of potential donors would still be willing to donate even if anonymity could not be guaranteed. Still, more than 75% of these potential donors felt positive towards releasing non-identifying information to offspring, such as physical characteristics and level of education. Single or homosexual men are significantly more inclined to release their identity than married, heterosexual men. Potential donors with children are less inclined to want to meet offspring than potential donors without children (9 versus 30% in the review). Potential donors in a relationship are less inclined to consider contact with offspring than single potential donors (7 versus 28% in the review). From US data, 20% would actively want to know and meet offspring and 40% would not object if the child wished to meet but would not solicit a meeting themselves. From Swedish data, where only non-anonymous donation is permitted in clinics, 87% of potential donors had a positive attitude towards future contact with offspring, although 80% of these potential donors did not feel that the donor had any moral responsibilities for the child later in life. Also from UK data, 80% of potential donors did not feel responsible for whatever happened with their sperm after the donation. With variation between different studies, between 33% and 94% of potential donors want to know at least whether or not the donation resulted in offspring. Some of these potential donors merely wanted to know if a pregnancy had been achieved but did not want to know any specific information about the offspring (e.g. sex, date of birth). Other potential donors felt that knowing the outcome of the donation made the experience more meaningful. In comparison, a German study came to the result that 11% of donors actually asked about the outcome in the clinic where they donated.

An Australian study concluded that potential donors who would still be willing to donate without a guarantee of anonymity were not automatically more open to extended or intimate contact with offspring.

Donor trackingedit

Even when donors choose to be anonymous, offspring may still find ways to learn more about their biological origins. Registries and DNA databases have been developed for this purpose. Registries that help donor-conceived offspring identify half-siblings from other mothers also help avoid accidental incest in adulthood.

Tracking by registriesedit

Offspring of anonymous donors may often have the ability to obtain their biological father's donor number from the fertility clinic or sperm bank used for their birth. They may then share their number on a registry. By finding shared donor numbers, offspring may find their genetic half-siblings. The donor may also find his number on a registry and choose to make contact with his offspring or otherwise reveal his identity.

Tracking by DNA databasesedit

Even sperm donors who have chosen anonymity and not to contact their offspring through a registry are now increasingly being traced by their children. Improved DNA technology has brought into question the possibility of assuring a donor's anonymity. For example, at least one child found his biological father using his own DNA test and internet research and was able to identify and contact his anonymous donor.

Fertility tourism and international sperm marketsedit

Different factors motivate individuals to seek sperm from outside their home state. For example, some jurisdictions do not allow unmarried women to receive donor sperm. Jurisdictional regulatory choices as well as cultural factors that discourage sperm donation have also led to international fertility tourism and sperm markets.

Swedenedit

When Sweden banned anonymous sperm donation in 1980, the number of active sperm donors dropped from approximately 200 to 30. Sweden now has an 18-month waiting list for donor sperm. At least 250 Swedish sperm recipients travel to Denmark annually for insemination. Some of this is also due to the fact that Denmark also allows single women to be inseminated.

United Kingdomedit

After the United Kingdom ended anonymous sperm donation in 2005, the numbers of sperm donors went up, reversing a three-year decline. However, there is still a shortage, and some doctors have suggested raising the limit of children per donor. Some UK clinics import sperm from Scandinavia.

Despite the shortage, sperm exports from the UK are legal and donors may remain anonymous in this context. However, the HFEA does impose safeguards on the export of sperm, such as that it must be exported to fertility clinics only and that the result of any treatment must be traceable. Sperm banks impose their own limits on the number of pregnancies obtained from exported sperm.

Since 2009, the import of sperm via registered clinics for use in the UK has been authorised by the HFEA. The sperm must have been processed, stored and quarantined in compliance with UK regulations. The donors have agreed to be identified when the children produced with their sperm reach the age of eighteen. The number of children produced from such donors in the UK will, of course, be subject to HFEA rules (i.e. currently a limit of ten families,) but the donors' sperm may be used worldwide in accordance with the clinic's own limit of one child per 200.000 of population, subject to national or local limits which apply. By 2014 the UK was importing nearly 40% of its sperm requirements, up from 10% in 2005. In 2018 it was reported that almost half of the imported sperm into Britain came from Denmark (3,000 units).

Koreaedit

Korean Bioethics Law prohibits selling and buying of sperm between clinics, and each donor may only help giving rise to a child to one single couple. It suffers from a shortage.

Canadaedit

Canada prohibits payment for gamete donation beyond the reimbursement of expenses. Many Canadians import purchased sperm from the United States.

United Statesedit

The United States, which permits monetary compensation for sperm donors, has had an increase in sperm donors during the late 2000s recession.

Social controversyedit

The use of sperm donation is most common among single women and lesbians. Some sperm banks and fertility clinics, particularly in the US, Denmark and the UK, have a predominance of women being treated with donor sperm who come within these groups. This produces many ethical issues around the ideals of conventional parenting and has wider issues for society as a whole, including the issues of the role of men as parents, family support for children, and financial support for women with children.

The growth of sperm banks and fertility clinics, the use of sperm agencies and the availability of anonymous donor sperm have served to make sperm donation a more respectable, and therefore a more socially acceptable, procedure. The intervention of doctors and others may be seen as making the whole process a respectable and merely a medical procedure which raises no moral issues, where donor inseminations may be referred to as 'treatments' and donor children as 'resulting from the use of a donor's sperm', or 'born following donation' and subsequent children may be described as 'born using the same donor' rather than as biological children of the same male.

A 2009 study has indicated that both men and women view the use of donor sperm with more skepticism compared with the use of donor eggs, suggesting a unique underlying perception regarding the use of male donor gametes.

As acceptance of sperm donation has generally increased, so has the level of questioning as to whether 'artificial' means of conception are necessary, and some donor children too, have been critical of the procedures which were taken to bring them into the world. Against this background has been the increase in the use of NI as a method of sperm donation. However, while some donors may be willing to offer this as a method of impregnation, it has many critics and it also raises further legal and social challenges.

Some donor children grow up wishing to find out who their fathers were, but others may be wary of embarking on such a search since they fear they may find scores of half-siblings who have been produced from the same sperm donor. Even though local laws or rules may restrict the numbers of offspring from a single donor, there are no worldwide limitations or controls and most sperm banks will onsell and export all their remaining stocks of vials of sperm when local maxima have been attained (see 'onselling' above).

One item of research has suggested that donor children have a greater likelihood of substance abuse, mental illness and criminal behavior when grown. However, its motivation and credibility have been questioned.

Coming forward publicly with problems is difficult for donor-conceived people as these issues are very personal and a public statement may attract criticism. Additionally, it may upset their parents if they speak out. A website called Anonymous Us has been set up where they can post details of their experiences anonymously, on which there are many accounts of problems.