Acceptance and rejection of "morally challenging" behaviour in online sperm donation communities: narrative interviews with recipients and donors
Study documents widespread concerns about deception and sexual coercion in unregulated online sperm donation communities
Forshall, G.C., Jones, G.L., & Turner-Moore, R. (2024). Acceptance and rejection of "morally challenging" behaviour in online sperm donation communities: narrative interviews with recipients and donors. Frontiers in Reproductive Health, 6, 1222601. https://doi.org/10.3389/frph.2024.1222601
Geographic Region: Global
Research Question: What are donor and recipient perceptions and experiences of morally challenging behavior in online sperm donation communities and to what extent do they accept or reject these behaviors?
Research Methods: Semi-structured interviews using an adapted version of the Real-Life Moral Choice and Conflict Interview.
Sample: 3 white, heterosexual men, aged 28-36, from US, Australia, and UK with multiple donor children. 5 white women, aged 38-47, who sought sperm donors online.
Analysis Methods: Carol Gilligan's Listening Guide Method, focusing on context of moral conflicts, narrator's sense of self, and contrapuntal voices of acceptance/rejection
Key Findings:
Recipients worried about: Donors using fake profiles or false names, Not knowing donors' true identities, and Donors being dishonest about their circumstances (e.g., not telling their wives)
Recipients reported: Unwanted sexual messages, Pressure to have sex instead of artificial insemination, Sexually coercive behavior, and Difficulty finding donors without sexual motivations.
Donors worried about: Finding suitable recipients (based on health, lifestyle, and ability to afford raising children) and Recipients suddenly cutting contact.
Donors acknowledged: Sexual motivation was common in the community, Estimated 70-80% of donors preferred natural insemination, and Disagreed on whether this was acceptable or problematic
Limitations: Small sample size, mostly white and heterosexual participants
Applications:
Highlights need for improved safeguarding in online sperm donation while respecting donor/recipient autonomy.
Further research needed on prevalence of problematic behaviors.
Funding Source: Masters by Research studentship funded by Leeds Beckett University
Regulatory Context: Online sperm donation is unregulated. In clinical settings, “known” or “directed” donation is often subject to some of the same regulations as bank/program donors.
Lead Author: Georgina Forshall is a PhD student in psychology at Leeds Beckett University (UK)