Early disclosure and family identity may influence donor sibling relationship dynamics
Donor sibling relations among adult offspring conceived via insemination by lesbian parents (Koh, 2023)
Koh, A. S., Bos, H. M. W., Rothblum, E. D., Carone, N., & Gartrell, N. K. (2023). Donor sibling relations among adult offspring conceived via insemination by lesbian parents. Human Reproduction, 38(11), 2166-2174. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dead175
Geographic Region: United States
Research Question: How do adult offspring in planned lesbian-parent families feel about and relate to their donor (half) sibling(s)?
Design: Online surveys conducted from March 2021 to November 2022 as part of the US National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study (Wave 7). Statistical analysis of responses regarding donor sibling relationships, contact, and attitudes.
Sample: 75 adult offspring ages 30-33 years old (52% female, 48% male). Most were White (90.7%) and heterosexual (68%). The response rate was 90%. All participants knew about their donor-conception status by age 10. Donor types included:
32% Known since childhood (directed donation)
26.7% Anonymous nonidentified
20.3% Open-identity nonidentified
12% Open-identity contacted since age 18
9.3% Anonymous contacted through registry
Key Findings
Participants felt neutral about the importance of knowing if they had donor siblings. This neutral stance was consistent regardless of whether they had found siblings or not.
Just over half (53%) of the adult offspring discovered they had donor siblings. The median age at which offspring identified their first donor sibling was 19 years old.
Among those who found siblings, most discovered relatively small groups, with three-quarters finding five or fewer donor siblings. A small number of participants discovered more than 20 siblings.
Donor sibling registries and sperm bank databases were the most common path to identification, used by 45% of those who found siblings. About equal numbers found their siblings through donor contact (29%) or through their parents (29%).
Most offspring (78%) who identified donor siblings chose to make contact with them. The primary motivation for contact was curiosity about what the siblings were like, cited by 61% of participants. Other common motivations included seeking better self-understanding (39%) and desire to form relationships (39%).
When describing these relationships, participants most frequently viewed donor siblings as acquaintances (48%), followed by viewing them as brothers/sisters (39%), friends (36%), or relatives (26%). 51% considered donor siblings as "only a genetic connection”.
Among those who established contact, about two-thirds maintained ongoing relationships with at least one donor sibling. The most common methods of maintaining contact were in-person meetings (60%), social media (55%), and phone calls (40%). The quality of these relationships was generally positive, with participants rating them an average of 4.03 out of 5 (1 = Very badly, to 5 = Very well). Observed minimal and maximal scores were 3.00 and 5.00, respectively.
Participants disclosed these relationships widely, with most telling both their biological and non-biological mothers (81%), close friends (77%), and partners (69%). The impact of these relationships on existing family connections was largely neutral to positive.
Limitations: Sample not representative of diversity in donor-conceived offspring of lesbian-parent families. Small sample size. Does not capture ongoing changes in donor-sibling relationships over time.
Applications: The varied ways participants chose to maintain donor sibling relationships - from no contact to close connections - demonstrates the need for flexibility in donor registry systems and professional support services to accommodate different levels of desired contact among donor-conceived people.
Lead Author: Audrey Koh is affiliated with the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences at the University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine.
Regulatory Context
There are no comprehensive federal laws regulating gamete donation or donor conception in the U.S. The process is largely self-regulated by the fertility industry.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does have some oversight, primarily related to screening and testing of donors for infectious diseases.
The American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) provides ethical guidelines and recommendations for donation practices. However, these are not legally binding.
There are no legal limits on compensation for donors. A 2011 court ruling (Kamakahi v. ASRM) determined that price caps on donor compensation violate antitrust laws.
ASRM recommends a minimum age of 21 for gamete donors, but this is not legally mandated.
The U.S. does not have laws prohibiting anonymous donation.
Some states have enacted their own laws regarding aspects of assisted reproduction, and parentage, but these vary widely.