A recent study published within the PLoS ONE Journal aimed to research the attitudes and experiences of Danish men who were sperm donors greater than ten years ago.

Study: Experiences and attitudes of Danish men who were sperm donors greater than 10 years ago; a qualitative interview study. Image Credit:NewAfrica/Shutterstock.com

Background

Extensive research has been conducted on men’s reasoning for becoming sperm donors. Nevertheless, fewer studies have taken place on the long-term impact of getting been a sperm donor.

Previous studies have been conducted on donors’ motivations for disclosing their identity and their experiences and attitudes toward contact with donor-conceived offspring. Nevertheless, more knowledge is required on the variability of experiences and attitudes.

Analyzing the long-term impact of sperm donors is essential since their attitudes can change over time attributable to their situation and society as an entire. Changes in personal circumstances may end up in a rethinking of previous actions and decisions, together with regret.

Moreover, political and historical developments may also change the meaning and impact of sperm donation. Recent technological advancements can threaten donor identities beyond the control of individual donors and sperm banks.

Furthermore, attention has been given to the rights of donor-conceived individuals (DCPs) to have details about donors leading to many countries changing their jurisdiction on donor rights and anonymity.

In regards to the study

The study took place within the context of Danish laws, which allowed only anonymous sperm donation till 2007. After 2007, sperm donors had the choice of anonymous or non-anonymous donation.

In non-anonymous donation, the offspring could receive the name and latest address of the donor on request to the sperm bank after they reached 18 years of age, while within the case of anonymous donation, they may not. In each cases, the donors couldn’t receive identifying details about their DCPs.

The recruitment of participants for the present study took place via Cryos International sperm bank from February to November 2021. The 2 inclusion criteria were that that they had been greater than ten years since their last donation and had available contact information.

Data collection took place through interviews via phone and video calls that lasted about 24 minutes. Finally, data evaluation was done using reflexive thematic evaluation.

Study findings

Twenty-three former donors participated within the study. Most donors’ former time as sperm donors were reported to be unproblematic and never a subject for further reflection. The participants gave several reasons for becoming sperm donors.

First, many were students on the time of recruitment, and sperm donation was a straightforward solution to make some more money. Second, they wanted a chance to assist people fighting infertility. Third, some men were interested in their sperm quality.

Finally, anonymity was necessary for them to even take into consideration becoming a donor. Just one participant regretted becoming a donor because he was informed that a diseased child was born from his donation.

Most men stated in the course of the interview that being a sperm donor belonged to the past and was irrelevant to their present life. Most men indicated that there was no relationship or relatedness to donor offspring in any respect.

They distinguished between fatherhood and genetic origin, with sperm donation being related only to the latter. They expressed that knowledge of their donor offspring could create unwanted feelings of responsibility towards them, which they didn’t want.

Most men had stated to tell their current partners about their sperm donation previously, and these partners were overall accepting of it. Although some donors accepted that knowledge about genetic inheritance could possibly be necessary to some DCPs, their rights to anonymity and protection of their family carried more weight.

Many donors mentioned that the chance of unwarranted contact from a DCP is uncertain in sperm donation. Many expressed that breach of anonymity could create unwanted problems of their lives, especially regarding the impact on their children, who were unaware that their fathers had been sperm donors.

Many were concerned that offspring-initiated contact would force upon them a private relationship and would make them more obliged to supply answers. Some men believed setting boundaries can be necessary if a donor offspring unexpectedly made contact to guard their family. Nevertheless, two men without children expressed their desire to fulfill their offspring.

Conclusion

Subsequently, the present study demonstrates that the majority former sperm donors valued their anonymity and weren’t interested by contacting donor offspring. They were more concerned about their circle of relatives and kids and didn’t wish to disturb their current lives.

For many men, sperm donation was their past, they usually didn’t wish to reflect upon it further.

Limitations

One necessary limitation of the study was that the sample didn’t represent all of the Danish sperm donors. This makes the findings nongeneralizable.