Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T20:37:42.293Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part I - ‘DIY’ Donor Linking: Issues and Implications

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 July 2023

Edited by
Fiona Kelly ,
Deborah Dempsey  and
Adrienne Byrt
Fiona Kelly
Affiliation:
La Trobe University, Victoria
Deborah Dempsey
Affiliation:
Swinburne University of Technology, Victoria
Adrienne Byrt
Affiliation:
Swinburne University of Technology, Victoria
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Donor-Linked Families in the Digital Age
Relatedness and Regulation
 , pp. 13 - 100
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2023

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Adams, D. (2021). Child Welfare Paramountcy: The Donor Conception Paradox. Bedford Park, South Australia: Flinders University.Google Scholar
Adams, D. H. (2013). Conceptualising a child-centric paradigm. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 10(3), 369–381. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-013-9454-7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Adams, D., & Allan, S. (2013). Building a family tree: donor-conceived people, DNA tracing and donor ‘anonymity’. Australian Journal of Adoption, 7(2), 1–16.Google Scholar
Adams, D., & Lorbach, C. (2012). Accessing donor conception information in Australia: a call for retrospective access. Journal of Law and Medicine, 19(4), 707–721. PMID: 22908615.Google Scholar
Allan, S. (2011). Psycho-social, ethical and legal arguments for and against the retrospective release of information about donors to donor-conceived individuals in Australia. Journal of Law and Medicine, 19(2), 354–376.Google Scholar
Allan, S. (2016). Donor Conception and the Search for Information: From Secrecy and Anonymity to Openness. Abingdon: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315568171Google Scholar
Blyth, E., Crawshaw, M., Frith, L., & Jones, C. (2012). Donor-conceived people’s views and experiences of their genetic origins: a critical analysis of the research evidence. Journal of Law and Medicine, 19(4), 769.Google Scholar
Blyth, E., & Farrand, A. (2004). Anonymity in donor-assisted conception and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. The International Journal of Children’s Rights, 12, 89.Google Scholar
Blyth, E., & Frith, L. (2015). Access to genetic and biographical history in donor conception: an analysis of recent trends and future possibilities. In Horsey, K. (Ed.), Revisiting the Regulation of Human Fertilisation and Embryology (pp. 136–152). Abingdon: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourne, K., Johnson, L., Anderson, C., & Hunter, E. (2018). Donor applications to the Victorian central register. In The ART of Caring Book of Abstracts (p. 63). Australia: Fertility Society of Australia.Google Scholar
Chicoine, S. (2020). The birth of fertility fraud: how to protect Washingtonians. Washington Law Review Online, 95, 168.Google Scholar
Cooke, M. (2019) Ohio family devastated by IVF terror. BioEdge (accessed 6 October 2021) www.bioedge.org/bioethics/ohio-family-devastated-by-ivf-error/13166.Google Scholar
Council of Europe (2019) Anonymous Donation of Sperm and Oocytes: Balancing the Rights of Parents, Donors and Children. Strasbourg: Parliamentary Assembly. http://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-EN.asp?fileid=27680Google Scholar
Crawshaw, M., & Dally, J. (2012). Producing sperm, egg and embryo donors’ pen portraits and other personal information for later use by donor offspring: an exploratory study of professional practices. Human Fertility, 15(2), 82–88. https://doi.org/10.3109/14647273.2012.68712Google Scholar
Crawshaw, M., & Daniels, K. (2019). Revisiting the use of ‘counselling’ as a means of preparing prospective parents to meet the emerging psychosocial needs of families that have used gamete donation. Families, Relationships and Societies, 8(3), 395–409. https://doi.org/10.1332/204674318X15313158773308Google Scholar
Crawshaw, M., Daniels, K., Adams, D., Bourne, K., van Hooff, J. A. P., Kramer, W., … & Thorn, P. (2015). Emerging models for facilitating contact between people genetically related through donor conception: a preliminary analysis and discussion. Reproductive Biomedicine & Society Online, 1(2), 71–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbms.2015.10.001Google Scholar
Crawshaw, M., Frith, L., van den Akker, O., & Blyth, E. (2016). Voluntary DNA-based information exchange and contact services following donor conception: an analysis of service users’ needs. New Genetics and Society, 35(4), 372–392. https://doi.org/10.1080/14636778.2016.1253462.Google Scholar
Crawshaw, M. (2018). Direct-to-consumer DNA testing: the fallout for individuals and their families unexpectedly learning of their donor conception origins. Human Fertility, 21(4), 225–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2017.1339127Google Scholar
Daniels, K. R. (2004). Building a Family with the Assistance of Donor Insemination. Palmerston North, NZ: Dunmore Press.Google Scholar
Darroch, F. and Smith, I. (2021) Establishing identity: how direct-to-consumer genetic testing challenges the assumption of donor anonymity. Family Court Review, 59(1), 103–120.Google Scholar
Dingle, C. (2021). Brave New Humans – The Dirty Reality of Donor Conception. London: Hardie Grant Books.Google Scholar
Donovan, C. (2006). Genetics, fathers, and families: exploring the implications of changing the law in favour of identifying sperm donors. Social & Legal Studies, 15(4), 494–510. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0964663906069543Google Scholar
Finkler, K. (2000). The New Genetics: Family and Kinship on the Medical Frontier. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Fox, D., Cohen, I. G., & Adashi, E. Y. (2019). Fertility fraud, legal firsts, and medical ethics. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 134(5), 918–920. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000003516Google Scholar
Frith, L. (2001). Beneath the rhetoric: the role of rights in the practice of non‐anonymous gamete donation. Bioethics, 15(5–6), 473–484. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8519.00255.Google Scholar
Frith, L. (2001a). Gamete donation and anonymity: the ethical and legal debate. Human Reproduction, 16(5), 818–824. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/16.5.818CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frith, L. (2015). The limits of evidence: evidence-based policy and the removal of gamete donor anonymity in the UK. Monash Bioethics Review, 33(1), 29–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-015-0017-zGoogle Scholar
Frith, L., Blyth, E., Crawshaw, M., & van den Akker, O. (2018). Secrets and disclosure in donor conception. Sociology of Health & Illness, 40(1), 188–203.Google Scholar
Gilman, L., & Nordqvist, P. (2018). Organizing openness: how UK policy defines the significance of information and information sharing about gamete donation. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 32(3), 316–333. https://doi.org/10.1093/lawfam/eby014.Google Scholar
Gollancz, D. (2020, 17 December) The right to establish identity: donor-offspring. UK Human Rights Blog. https://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2020/12/17/the-right-to-establish-identity-donor-offspring-david-gollancz/Google Scholar
Guardian, The. (2022, 20 May), UK fertility watchdog could recommend scrapping donor anonymity law. www.theguardian.com/society/2022/may/20/uk-fertility-watchdog-could-recommend-scrapping-donor-anonymity-lawGoogle Scholar
Guerrini, C. J., Robinson, J. O., Bloss, C. C., Brooks, W. B., Fullerton, S. M., Kirkpatrick, B., … & McGuire, A. L. (2022). Family secrets: experiences and outcomes of participating in direct-to-consumer genetic relative-finder services. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 109(3), 486–497.Google Scholar
Harper, J. C., Kennett, D., & Reisel, D. (2016). The end of donor anonymity: how genetic testing is likely to drive anonymous gamete donation out of business. Human Reproduction, 31(6), 1135–1140. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dew06Google Scholar
Hertz, R., & Nelson, M. K. (2018). Random Families: Genetic Strangers, Sperm Donor Siblings, and the Creation of New Kin. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Huffman, C. S., & Smith, M. (2021, May 14). Dallas woman advocates expanding fertility fraud law. WFAA. www.wfaa.com/article/news/local/investigates/dallas-woman-eve-wiley-advocates-expanding-fertility-fraud-law/287-5ad8424f-ed1f-4b48-9f5c-b3df1ed6cbc4.)Google Scholar
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. (2019). Code of Practice. https://portal.hfea.gov.uk/media/1605/2019-12-03-code-of-practice-december-2019.pdfGoogle Scholar
Indekeu, A., Bolt, S. H., & Maas, A. J. B. (2021). Meeting multiple same-donor offspring: psychosocial challenges. Human Fertility, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2021.1872804Google Scholar
Indekeu, A., & Hens, K. (2019). Part of my story: the meaning and experiences of genes and genetics for sperm donor-conceived offspring. New Genetics and Society, 38(1), 18–37.Google Scholar
Isaksson, S., Sydsjö, G., Svanberg, A. S., & Lampic, C. (2019). Managing absence and presence of child–parent resemblance: a challenge for heterosexual couples following sperm donation. Reproductive Biomedicine & Society Online, 8, 38–46. https://doi.org/10.org/j.rbms.2019.07.001Google Scholar
Ishii, T., & de Miguel Beriain, I. (2022). Shifting to a model of donor conception that entails a communication agreement among the parents, donor, and offspring. BMC Medical Ethics, 23(1), 18.Google Scholar
ISOGG (2021, 28 September) DNA testing for the donor conceived. International Society for Genetic Genealogists Wiki. https://isogg.org/wiki/DNA_testing_for_the_donor_conceivedGoogle Scholar
Jadva, V., Freeman, T., Kramer, W., & Golombok, S. (2010). Experiences of offspring searching for and contacting their donor siblings and donor. Reproductive Biomedicine Online, 20(4), 523–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2010.01.001Google Scholar
Johns, R. (2013). Abolishing anonymity: a rights-based approach to evaluating anonymous sperm donation. UCLA Women’s Law Journal, 20, 111.Google Scholar
Kirkman-Brown, J, Calhaz-Jorge, C, Dancet, E, Lundin, K, Martins, M, … Frith, L. (2022). Good practice recommendations for information provision for those involved in reproductive donation. Human Reproduction Open, (1), https://doi.org/doi:10.1093/hropen/hoac001Google Scholar
Klotz, M. (2014). (K) Information: Gamete Donation and Kinship Knowledge in Germany and Britain (Vol. 32). Frankfurt: Campus Verlag.Google Scholar
Klotz, M. (2016). Wayward relations: novel searches of the donor-conceived for genetic kinship. Medical Anthropology, 35(1), 45–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/01459740.2015.1012615Google Scholar
Lippman, A. (1991). Prenatal genetic testing and screening: constructing needs and reinforcing inequities. American Journal of Law & Medicine, 17(1–2), 15–50. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0098858800007917Google Scholar
Londini, V. (2019). The open future of donor conception. BioNews. www.bionews.org.uk/page_143093Google Scholar
McGovern, P. G., & Schlaff, W. D. (2018). Sperm donor anonymity: a concept rendered obsolete by modern technology. Fertility and Sterility, 109(2), 230–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.12.011Google Scholar
Moore, C. (2016). The history of genetic genealogy and unknown parentage research: An insider’s view. Journal of Genetic Genealogy, 8(1), 35–37.Google Scholar
O’Brien, M. (2021, 17 July) Who has the largest DNA database? Data Mining DNA. www.dataminingdna.com/who-has-the-largest-dna-database/Google Scholar
Odze, L. (2018) Surrogacy and risks of family secrets. In Cabeza, R., Flowers, V., Pierrot, E., Rao, A., O’Leary, B. and Odze, L (Eds.), Surrogacy: Law, Practice and Policy in England and Wales (pp. 133–160). Bristol: LexisNexis.Google Scholar
Ojomu, N. (2019, 13 January) Man’s horror as DNA test reveals he’s dating his half-sister. Yahoo!Lifestyle. https://au.lifestyle.yahoo.com/mans-horror-dna-test-reveals-hes-dating-half-sister-044310902.htmlGoogle Scholar
Pennings, G. (2019). Genetic databases and the future of donor anonymity. Human Reproduction, 34(5), 786–790.Google Scholar
Peterson, P. (2019, 26 June). He found out he had 32 siblings. For The Times magazine, he took their pictures. The New York Times. www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/06/26/magazine/sperm-donor-siblings.htmlGoogle Scholar
Ravelingien, A., & Pennings, G. (2013). The right to know your genetic parents: from open-identity gamete donation to routine paternity testing. The American Journal of Bioethics, 13(5), 33–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2013.776128.Google Scholar
Ravitsky, V. (2017). The right to know one’s genetic origins and cross-border medically assisted reproduction. Israel Journal of Health Policy Research, 6(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13584-016-0125-0Google Scholar
Sforza, T. (2007). Fertility fraud settlements cost millions. The Orange County Register, 26 June.Google Scholar
Shapiro, D. (2019). Inheritance: A Memoir of Genealogy, Paternity, and Love. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
Sharak, S. (2020). Richards v. Kiken and the legal implications of fertility fraud. American Journal of Law & Medicine, 46(4), 528–535.Google Scholar
Smart, C. (2011). Families, secrets and memories. Sociology, 45(4), 539–553. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0038038511406585Google Scholar
Strathern, M. (1999). Refusing information. In Strathern, M. (Ed.), Property, Substance, and Effect: Anthropological Essays on Persons and Things (pp. 64–86). London: Athlone Press.Google Scholar
Tobin, J. W. (2012). Donor conceived individuals and access to information about their genetic origins: the relevance and role of rights. Journal of Law and Medicine, 19(4), 742–757.Google Scholar
Tallandini, M. A., Zanchettin, L., Gronchi, G., & Morsan, V. (2016). Parental disclosure of assisted reproductive technology (ART) conception to their children: a systematic and meta-analytic review. Human Reproduction, 31(6), 1275–1287.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van den Akker, O. (2010). Nature and nurture: what do theory and research tell us. In Crawshaw, M. and Balen, R. (Eds.), Adopting after Infertility: Messages from Practice, Research, and Personal Experience (pp. 164–179). London: Kingsley Publishers.Google Scholar
WADC. (2017) We are donor conceived 2017 survey results. We Are Donor Conceived. www.wearedonorconceived.com/uncategorized/survey-results/Google Scholar
WADC. (2020) We are donor conceived survey report. We Are Donor Conceived. www.wearedonorconceived.com/2020-survey-top/2020-we-are-donor-conceived-survey/Google Scholar
Weiner, K., Martin, P., Richards, M., & Tutton, R. (2017). Have we seen the geneticisation of society? Expectations and evidence. Sociology of Health & Illness, 39(7), 989–1004. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.12551.Google Scholar
Wincott, E., & Crawshaw, M. (2006). From a social issue to policy: social work’s advocacy for the rights of donor conceived people to genetic origins information in the United Kingdom. Social Work in Health Care, 43(2–3), 53–72. DOI: 10.1300/J010v43n02_05Google Scholar

References

Allan, S. (2016). Donor Conception and the Search for Information: From Secrecy and Anonymity to Openness. Routledge.Google Scholar
Australian Broadcasting Company. (2015). The Donor Detectives, Background Briefing (available at: www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/backgroundbriefing/the-donor-detectives/6996896).Google Scholar
Cosson, B., Dempsey, D., & Kelly, F. (2021). Secret shame – male infertility and donor conception in the wake of retrospective legislative change. Men and Masculinities, 25(2), 497–515.Google Scholar
Crawshaw, M., Daniels, K., Adams, D., Bourne, K., van Hooff, J. A. P., Kramer, W., … & Thorn, P. (2015). Emerging models for facilitating contact between people genetically related through donor conception: a preliminary analysis and discussion. Reproductive Biomedicine & Society Online, 1(2), 71–80.Google Scholar
Dempsey, D., Kelly, F., Horsfall, B., Hammarberg, K., Bourne, K., & Johnson, L. (2019). Applications to statutory donor registers in Victoria, Australia: information sought and expectations of contact. Reproductive Biomedicine & Society Online, 9, 28–36.Google Scholar
Dingle, S. (2021). Brave New Humans: The Dirty Truth behind the Fertility Industry. Hardie Grant Books.Google Scholar
Freeman, T., Zadeh, S., Smith, V., & Golombok, S. (2016). Disclosure of sperm donation: a comparison between solo mother and two-parent families with identifiable donors. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 33(5), 592–600.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. E., & Scheib, J. E. (2015). Female-partnered and single women’s contact motivations and experiences with donor-linked families. Human Reproduction, 30(6), 1375–1385.Google Scholar
Golombok, S., & Wilkinson, S. (Eds.), (2016). Regulating Reproductive Donation. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Harper, J. C., Kennett, D., & Reisel, D. (2016). The end of donor anonymity: how genetic testing is likely to drive anonymous gamete donation out of business. Human Reproduction, 31(6), 1135–1140.Google Scholar
Hertz, R., & Nelson, M. K. (2018). Random Families: Genetic Strangers, Sperm Donor Siblings, and the Creation of New Kin. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hertz, R., Nelson, M. K., & Kramer, W. (2013). Donor conceived offspring conceive of the donor: the relevance of age, awareness, and family form. Social Science & Medicine, 86, 52–65.Google Scholar
Kelly, F. J., & Dempsey, D. J. (2016). Experiences and motives of Australian single mothers by choice who make early contact with their child’s donor relatives. Medical Law Review, 24(4), 571–590.Google Scholar
Kelly, F., Dempsey, D., Power, J., Bourne, K., Hammarberg, K., & Johnson, L. (2019). From stranger to family or something in between: donor linking in an era of retrospective access to anonymous sperm donor records in Victoria, Australia. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 33(3), 277–297.Google Scholar
Kelly, F., Dempsey, D., & Frew, C. (2019). The donor-linking practices of Australian fertility clinics. Journal of Law and Medicine, 27(2), 355–368.Google Scholar
National Health and Medical Research Council. (2017). Ethical Guidelines on the Use of Assisted Reproductive Technology in Clinical Practice and Research.Google Scholar
Victorian Assisted Reproductive Treatment Authority. (2018/19). Annual Report.Google Scholar
We Are Donor Conceived. (2020). 2020 Survey Report (available at: www.wearedonorconceived.com/2020-survey-top/2020-we-are-donor-conceived-survey/).Google Scholar

References

Bolt, S., Postema, D., van der Heij, A., & Maas, A. J. B. (2019). Anonymous Dutch Sperm Donors Releasing Their Identity. Human Fertility.Google Scholar
Costa, E. (2018). Affordances-in-practice: An ethnographic critique of social media logic and context collapse. New Media & Society, 20(10), 3641–3656. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818756290Google Scholar
Dempsey, D., & Kelly, F. (2017). Transnational third-party assisted conception: pursuing the desire for ‘origins’ information in the internet era. In Davies, M. (ed.) Babies for Sale? Transnational Surrogacy, Human Rights and the Politics of Reproduction, 204–217. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350218567.ch-011Google Scholar
Dempsey, D., Nordqvist, P., & Kelly, F. (2021). Beyond secrecy and openness: Telling a relational story about children’s best interests in donor-conceived families. BioSocieties, 17(3). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41292-021-00225-9Google Scholar
Duffy, B. E., & Chan, N. K. (2019). ‘You never really know who’s looking’: Imagined surveillance across social media platforms. New Media & Society, 21(1), 119–138. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818791318Google Scholar
Duguay, S. (2016). ‘He has a way gayer Facebook than I do’: Investigating sexual identity disclosure and context collapse on a social networking site. New Media & Society, 18(6), 891–907. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814549930Google Scholar
Gangneux, J. (2021). ‘It is an attitude’: The normalisation of social screening via profile checking on social media. Information, Communication & Society, 24(7), 994–1008. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2019.1668460Google Scholar
Gershon, I. (2018). Every click you make, I’ll be watching you: Facebook stalking and neoliberal information. In A Networked Self and Birth, Life, Death, edited by Papacharissi, Zizi (pp. 104–120). Routledge.Google Scholar
Jadva, V., Freeman, T., Kramer, W., & Golombok, S. (2010). Experiences of offspring searching for and contacting their donor siblings and donor. Reproductive Biomedicine Online, 20(4), 523–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2010.01.001Google Scholar
Kelly, F., & Dempsey, D. (2016). The family law implications of early contact between sperm donors and their donor offspring. Family Matters, 98, 54–63.Google Scholar
Kelly, F., Dempsey, D., Power, J., Bourne, K., Hammarberg, K., & Johnson, L. (2019). From stranger to family or something in between: Donor linking in an era of retrospective access to anonymous sperm donor records in Victoria, Australia. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 33(3), 277–297. https://doi.org/10.1093/lawfam/ebz011Google Scholar
Marwick, A. E., & Boyd, D. (2011). I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society, 13(1), 114–133.’ https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810365313Google Scholar
Newton, G., & Southerton, C. (2021). Situated talk: A method for a reflexive encounter with# donorconceived on TikTok. Media International Australia, 186(1), 66–80.Google Scholar
Standlee, A. (2019). Friendship and online filtering: The use of social media to construct offline social networks. New Media & Society, 21(3), 770–785. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818806844Google Scholar
Van den Akker, O. B. A., Crawshaw, M. A., Blyth, E. D., & Frith, L. J. (2015). Expectations and experiences of gamete donors and donor-conceived adults searching for genetic relatives using DNA linking through a voluntary register. Human Reproduction, 30(1), 111–121. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deu289Google Scholar

References

Bergen, N., & Delacroix, C. (2019). Bypassing the sperm bank: Documenting the experiences of online informal sperm donors. Critical Public Health, 29(5), 584–595. https://doi.org/10.1080/09581596.2018.1492704Google Scholar
Bossema, E., Pim, M., Janssens, R., Treucker, F., van Duinen, K., Nap, A., & Geenen, R. (2014). An inventory of reasons for sperm donation in formal versus informal settings, Human Fertility, 17(1), 21–27. https://doi.org/10.3109/14647273.2014.881561Google Scholar
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oaGoogle Scholar
Cook, H., & Tomazin, F. (2021). “Sperm drought fuels unregulated online market and sex assault concerns”, The Age, 22 May. www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/sperm-drought-fuels-unregulated-online-market-and-sex-assault-concerns-20210521-p57u0s.htmlGoogle Scholar
Cook, R., & Golombok, S. (1995). A survey of semen donation: Phase II – the view of the donors, Human Reproduction, 10(4), 951–959. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a136069Google Scholar
Daniels, K. R., Curson, R.,& Lewis, G.M. (1996a). Semen donor recruitment: A study of donors in two clinics, Human Reproduction, 11, 746–751. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a019247Google Scholar
Daniels, K. R., Ericsson, H. L., & Burn, I. P (1996b). Families and donor insemination: The views of semen donors, Scandinavian Journal of Social Welfare, 5(4), 229–237. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2397.1996.tb00149.xGoogle Scholar
Dempsey, D. (2010). Conceiving and negotiating reproductive relationships: Lesbians and gay men forming families with children, Sociology, 44(6), 1145–1162. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0038038510381607Google Scholar
Dempsey, D. (2012a). More like a donor or more like a father? Gay men’s concepts of relatedness to children, Sexualities, 15(2), 156–174. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1363460711433735Google Scholar
Dempsey, D. (2012b) Gay male couples’ paternal involvement in lesbian parented families, Journal of Family Studies, 18(2–3), 155–164. https://doi.org/10.5172/jfs.2012.18.2-3.155Google Scholar
Freeman, T., Jadva, V., Tanfield, E., & Golombok, S. (2016). Online sperm donation: A survey of the demographic characteristics, motivations, preferences and experiences of sperm donors on a connection website. Human Reproduction, 31(9), 2082–2089. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dew166Google Scholar
Gilman, L. (2018). Toxic money or paid altruism: The meaning of payments for identity-release gamete donors. Sociology of Health & Illness, 40(4), 702–717. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.12718Google Scholar
Glover, A. (2018, 15 June). I found my sperm donor on Facebook. www.kidspot.com.au (accessed 24 February 2021).Google Scholar
Graham, S., Freeman, T., & Jadva, V. (2019). A comparison of the characteristics, motivations, preferences and expectations of men donating sperm online or through a sperm bank, Human Reproduction, 1(34), 2208–2218. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dez173Google Scholar
Hooper, A. (Host) (2018, 24 December): Jo Donor (Episode 1) [Audio podcast]. In Sperm Donation World Podcast.Google Scholar
Hooper, A. (Host) (2019, 20 January): The Patriarch: John Lyndsey Mayger (Episode 5) [Audio podcast]. In Sperm Donation World Podcast.Google Scholar
Kamenev, M. (2019). Sperm drought. The Monthly, August. www.themonthly.com.au/magazine/august-2019Google Scholar
Kelly, F., & Dempsey, D. (2016). The family law implications of early contact between sperm donors and their donor offspring. Family Matters, 98. https://aifs.gov.au/publications/family-matters/issue-98/family-law-implications-early-contact-between-sperm-donors-and-their-donor-offspringGoogle Scholar
Kelly, F., Dempsey, D., & Frew, C., (2019). The donor-linking practices of Australian fertility clinics, Journal of Law and Medicine, 27(2), 355–368.Google Scholar
Lavoie, K., Côté, I., & de Montigny, F. (2017). Assisted reproduction in the digital age: Stories of Canadian sperm donors offering their gametes online via introduction websites. Journal of Men’s Studies, 26(2), 184–202. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1060826517737047Google Scholar
Lever, C. (2020a, 29 November). Australia’s most-prolific sperm donor who fathered 23 children in ONE YEAR is investigated by authorities – after his “hobby” turned into a full-time job because mums love his ethnicity and strike rate. Daily Mail Australia, https://dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8989065/Married-freelance-sperm-donor-Alan-Phan-investigation-fathering-23-children-year.html (accessed 21 January 2021).Google Scholar
Lever, C. (2020b, 25 September). Australia’s chronic sperm donor shortage is causing family heartache. www.kidspot.com.au (accessed 24 February 2021).Google Scholar
Lever, C. (2020c, 1 December). Brisbane sperm donor Alan Phan investigated by VARTA after fathering 23 children. www.7news.com (accessed 21 January 2021).Google Scholar
McNair, R., & Dempsey, D. (2002). Exploring diversity in lesbian-parented families Paper 1: Family formation and women’s roles. Family Matters, (63), 40–49.Google Scholar
Mohr, S. (2014). Beyond motivation: On what it means to be a sperm donor in Denmark, Anthropology & Medicine, 21(2), 162–173. DOI: 10.1080/13648470.2014.914806Google Scholar
Nordqvist, P., & Smart, C. (2014). Relative strangers. Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Sage.Google Scholar
Power, J., Dempsey, D., Kelly, F., & Lau, M. (2020). Use of fertility services in Australian lesbian, bisexual and queer women’s pathways to parenthood. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 60(4), 610–615. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.13175Google Scholar
Power, J., Perlesz, A., McNair, R., Schofield, M., Pitts, M., Brown, R., & Bickerdike, A. (2012) Gay and bisexual dads and diversity: Fathers in the Work, Love, Play study, Journal of Family Studies, 18(2–3), 143–154, DOI: 10.5172/jfs.2012.18.2-3.143Google Scholar
Riggs, D. W. (2008a). Lesbian mothers, gay sperm donors, and community: Ensuring the well-being of children and families. Health Sociology Review, 17(3), 226–234.Google Scholar
Riggs, D. W. (2008b). Using multinomial logistic regression analysis to develop a model of Australian gay and heterosexual sperm donors’ motivations and beliefs. International Journal of Emerging Technologies & Society, 6(2), 107–123.Google Scholar
Riggs, D. W. & Russell, L. (2011). Characteristics of men willing to act as sperm donors in the context of identity-release legislation. Human Reproduction, 26(1), 266–272. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deq314Google Scholar
Riggs, D. W., & Scholz, B. (2011). The value and meaning attached to genetic relatedness among Australian sperm donors. New Genetics and Society, 30(1), 41–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/14636778.2011.552299Google Scholar
Sams, L. (2021, 5 February). Meet the father of 17 who leads Australia’s private sperm donor group. Australian Financial Mail. www.afm.com.au (accessed 24 February 2021).Google Scholar
Sixty Minutes Australia (2019, 18 February). Sperm donor plans to father 2500 children. www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGhbcTGZmkI.Google Scholar
Van den Broeck, U., Vandermeeran, M., Vanderschuren, D., Enzlin, P., Demyttenaere, K., & D’Hooghe, T. (2012). A systematic review of sperm donors: Demographic characteristics, attitudes, motives and experiences of the process of sperm donation. Human Reproduction Update, 19, 37–51. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dms039Google Scholar
Victorian Reproductive Assistance Authority (VARTA). (2018). Annual report. https://varta.org.au/sites/default/files/2020-11/VARTA%20annual%20report%202018.pdfGoogle Scholar
Victorian Assisted Reproductive Treatment Authority (VARTA). (2020). Annual report. https://varta.org.au/sites/default/files/2021-01/varta-annual-report-2020.pdf.pdfGoogle Scholar
Woestenburg, N., Winter, H., & Janssens, P. (2016). What motivates men to offer sperm donation via the Internet? Psychology Health Medicine, 21(4), 424–430. https://doi.org/10.1080/13548506.2015.1081702Google Scholar
Whyte, S. (2019). Clinical vs. exclusively online sperm donors: What’s the difference? Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 37(1), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/02646838.2018.1540864Google Scholar
Whyte, S., Savage, D., & Torgler, B. (2017). Online sperm donors: The impact of family, friends, personality and risk perception on behaviour. Reproductive Biomedicine Online, 35(6), 723–732. DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2017.08.023Google Scholar

References

Agence France Presse. (2019, 12 April). Il est surnommé le “docteur sperme” aux Pays-Bas: Jan Karbaat est suspecté d’avoir utilisé sa propre semence dans sa clinique. RTL Info. www.rtl.be/info/monde/europe/il-est-surnomme-le-docteur-sperme-aux-pays-bas-jan-karbaat-est-suspecte-d-avoir-utilise-sa-propre-semence-dans-sa-clinique-1115904.aspxGoogle Scholar
Beeson, D. R., Jennings, P. K., & Kramer, W. (2011). Offspring searching for their sperm donors: how family type shapes the process. Human Reproduction, 26(9), 2415–2424. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/der202Google Scholar
Bender, L. (2003). Genes, parents, and assisted reproductive technologies: ARTs, mistakes, sex, race, and law. Columbia Journal of Gender and Law, 12, 1.Google Scholar
Bender, L. (2005). To err is human: ART mix-ups – a labor-based, relational proposal. Journal of Gender, Race and Justice, 9, 443.Google Scholar
Blake, L., Zadeh, S., Statham, H., & Freeman, T. (2014). Families created by assisted reproduction: children’s perspectives. In Freeman, T., Graham, S., Ebtehaj, F., & Richards, M. (Eds.), Relatedness in Assisted Reproduction (pp. 251–269). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Blake, L., Ilioi, E., & Golombok, S. (2016). Thoughts and feelings about the donor: a family perspective. In Freeman, T., Graham, S., Ebtehaj, F., & Richards, M. (Eds.), Relatedness in Assisted Reproduction (pp. 293–331) Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Blyth, E. (2012). Discovering the ‘facts of life’ following anonymous donor insemination. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 26(2), 143–161. https://doi.org/10.1093/lawfam/ebs006Google Scholar
Blyth, E. (2012). Genes r us? Making sense of genetic and non-genetic relationships following anonymous donor insemination. Reproductive Biomedicine Online, 24(7), 719–726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2012.02.010Google Scholar
Byrne, E. (2019). Texas House passes bill classifying fertility fraud as sexual assault. The Texas Tribune. www.texastribune.org/2019/05/16/texas-house-bill-fertility-fraud-crime/Google Scholar
Canneaux, M., Kobilinsky, N., Wolf, J. P., Golse, B., & Beauquier-Maccotta, B. (2016). Information, transmission, secret: quel discours pour les enfants nés par don de gamètes?. Gynécologie obstétrique & fertilité, 44(7–8), 410–416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gyobfe.2016.05.002Google Scholar
Chicoine, S. (2020). The birth of fertility fraud: how to protect Washingtonians. Washington Law Review Online, 95(1), 168–204.Google Scholar
Cho, K., Ruiter, J., & Dahan, M. H. (2018). Protecting fertility clinics against sperm-related fraud: a call to action. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics, 35(6), 1131–1132. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-018-1175-8Google Scholar
Couture, V., Dubois, M. A., Drouin, R., Moutquin, J. M., & Bouffard, C. (2014). Strengths and pitfalls of Canadian gamete and embryo donor registries: searching for beneficent solutions. Reproductive Biomedicine Online, 28(3), 369–379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2013.10.020Google Scholar
Crawshaw, M. (2018). Direct-to-consumer DNA testing: the fallout for individuals and their families unexpectedly learning of their donor conception origins. Human Fertility, 21(4), 225–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2017.1339127Google Scholar
Freeman, T. (2015). Gamete donation, information sharing and the best interests of the child: an overview of the psychosocial evidence. Monash Bioethics Review, 33(1), 45–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-015-0018-yGoogle Scholar
Freeman, T., Jadva, J., & Slutsky, J. (2016). Sperm donors limited: psychosocial aspects of genetic connections and the regulation of offspring numbers. In Golombok, S., Scott, R., Appelby, J. B., Richards, M., Wilkinson, S. (Eds.), Regulating Reproductive Donation (pp. 165–184) Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fox, D. (2017). Reproductive negligence. Columbia Law Review, 117, 149.Google Scholar
Frith, L., Blyth, E., Crawshaw, M., & van den Akker, O. (2018). Secrets and disclosure in donor conception. Sociology of Health & Illness, 40(1), 188–203. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.12633Google Scholar
Golombok, S. (2015). Modern Families: Parents and Children in New Family Forms. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gruben, V., Cattapan, A., Cameron, A., Busby, K., Baylis, F., Carsley, S., … & White, P. (2019). Joint Submission to Health Canada on Prepublication of Proposed Regulations to the Assisted Human Reproduction Act.Google Scholar
Guichon, J. R., Mitchell, I., & Giroux, M. (Eds.), (2012). The Right to Know One’s Origins: Assisted Human Reproduction and the Best Interests of Children. ASP.Google Scholar
Harper, J. C., Kennett, D., & Reisel, D. (2016). The end of donor anonymity: how genetic testing is likely to drive anonymous gamete donation out of business. Human Reproduction, 31(6), 1135–1140. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dew065Google Scholar
Jadva, V., Freeman, T., Kramer, W., & Golombok, S. (2009). The experiences of adolescents and adults conceived by sperm donation: comparisons by age of disclosure and family type. Human Reproduction, 24(8), 1909–1919. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dep110Google Scholar
MacBride, K. (2021). Fertility doctors used their sperm to get patients pregnant. The children want justice. Vice News. www.vice.com/en/article/y3g5qy/fertility-doctors-used-their-sperm-to-get-patients-pregnant-the-children-want-justiceGoogle Scholar
Mac Dougall, K., Becker, G., Scheib, J. E., & Nachtigall, R. D. (2007). Strategies for disclosure: how parents approach telling their children that they were conceived with donor gametes. Fertility and Sterility, 87(3), 524–533. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.07.1514Google Scholar
Madeira, J. L. (2019). Uncommon misconceptions: holding physicians accountable for insemination fraud. Law & Inequality, 37, 45.Google Scholar
Madeira, J. L. (2020). Understanding illicit insemination and fertility fraud, from patient experience to legal reform. Columbia Journal of Gender & Law, 39, 110.Google Scholar
Mahlstedt, P. P., LaBounty, K., & Kennedy, W. T. (2010). The views of adult offspring of sperm donation: essential feedback for the development of ethical guidelines within the practice of assisted reproductive technology in the United States. Fertility and Sterility, 93(7), 2236–2246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.12.119Google Scholar
Miola, J. (2004). Mix-ups, mistake and moral judgement: recent developments in UK law on assisted conception. Feminist Legal Studies, 12(1), 67–77. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:FEST.0000026125.37716.d5Google Scholar
Nelson, M. K., Hertz, R., & Kramer, W. (2013). Making sense of donors and donor siblings: A comparison of the perceptions of donor-conceived offspring in lesbian-parent and heterosexual-parent families. In Visions of the Twenty-First Century Family: Transforming Structures and Identities (pp. 1–42). Emerald Group Publishing.Google Scholar
Paillé, P., & Mucchielli, A. (2016). L’analyse qualitative en sciences humaines et sociales. Quatrième édition. ed. Malakoff, . Armand Colin.Google Scholar
Paye, E. (2018). Barwin’s babies: the remarkable story of a disgraced Ottawa fertility doctor and those who say they are his children. Ottawa Citizen. https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/barwins-babiesGoogle Scholar
Pennings, G., Klitzman, R., Zegers-Hochschild, F. (2016). International regulation and cross-country comparisons. In Golombok, S., Scott, R., Appelby, J.B., Richards, M., Wilkinson, S. (Eds.), Regulating Reproductive Donation (pp. 39–59). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rodino, I. S., Burton, P. J., & Sanders, K. A. (2011). Donor information considered important to donors, recipients and offspring: an Australian perspective. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 22(3), 303–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2010.11.007Google Scholar
Sharak, S. (2020). Richards v. Kiken and the legal implications of fertility fraud. American Journal of Law & Medicine, 46(4), 528–535.Google Scholar
Tabachnik, S. (2020, 9 January). Proposed bill would finally make it a felony for doctors to inseminate patients with their own sperm. Denver Post. www.denverpost.com/2020/01/09/fertility-fraud-paul-jones-sperm-doctor-colorado/Google Scholar
The Associated Press. (2016, 12 September). Indiana fertility doctor used own sperm to impregnate patients, court docs say. CBS News. www.cbsnews.com/news/indiana-fertility-doctor-used-own-sperm-to-impregnate-women-court-docs-say/Google Scholar
Trépanier, A. (2020, 15 June). Class-action lawsuit against disgraced fertility doctor grows. CBS News. www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/norman-barwin-class-action-16-biological-children-1.5609426Google Scholar
Wright, K. (2016). Limiting offspring numbers: can we justify regulation? In Golombok, S., Scott, R., Appelby, J. B., Richards, M., & Wilkinson, S. (Eds.), Regulating Reproductive Donation (pp. 185–204). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×