Legal age limits in accessing donor information: experiences of donor-conceived people, parents, sperm donors and counsellors
Research shows one-size-fits-all age restrictions for identity disclosure fail to meet diverse needs of donor-conceived people
Bolt, S. H., Maas, A. J. B. M., Indekeu, A., & van Nistelrooij, I. (2024). Legal age limits in accessing donor information: experiences of donor-conceived people, parents, sperm donors and counsellors. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 48(6), Article 103846. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2024.103846
Geographic Region: The Netherlands
Research Question: What are the lived experiences of donor-conceived people, parents, sperm donors, and counsellors related to legal age limits on accessing donor information in the Netherlands?
Design: Phenomenological study using online qualitative in-depth interviews and focus groups with DCP, parents, sperm donors, and counselors between November 2021 and July 2022. Qualitative analysis using Dahlberg's Reflective Lifeworld Approach.
Sample:
20 donor-conceived individuals (18 female, 2 male; ages 12-29). 11 from mother-mother families, 7 from single-mother families, and 2 from mother-father families. 12 had contact with donor, 4 had no contact, aand 4 were under age 16 (not yet eligible).
15 parents (14 female, 1 male; ages 34-64). 6 single mothers, 5 mother-father families, and 4 mother-mother families.
6 sperm donors (ages 40-63) who donated between 1988 and 2004. 3 had contact with offspring and 3 no contact with offspring.
5 counsellors (3 female, 2 male, ages 33-64)
Key Findings:
Donor-conceived People
DCP expressed a strong desire for donor information during childhood and adolescence. For example, they described a need to understand physical appearance and character trait connections. This information was particularly important for those feeling "different" from their raising family. DCP wanted to integrate donor information into their life story. They felt age 16 was challenging time to receive information.
Many describe feelings of frustration and powerlessness while waiting for information, with some experiencing depression and loneliness during this period. The situation becomes especially difficult when donors became anonymous (see regulatory context below) or died before information could be accessed.
Within their families, donor-conceived people had to navigate complex loyalties, balancing their desire for information with their parents' comfort levels and siblings' different needs. Those with strong, stable family relationships generally manage the waiting period better, while family instability compounds the challenges of information access.
Parents
Single mothers reported a growing awareness of how information restrictions affect their children, often feeling helpless when unable to provide the information their children seek. They frequently looked for alternative ways to find donor information and expressed concern about the age 16 timing.
Parents in mother-father families tended to prioritize their children's needs over their own curiosity about the donor, with many appreciating how the age limits provide time to develop stable family relationships before donor information becomes accessible. These families particularly struggled with navigating different sibling needs and managing how the father's presence influenced children's comfort in seeking donor information.
Mother-mother families often viewed the donor as part of their extended family network and strongly believed in their children's right to information access. They expressed particular frustration with their inability to provide information when their children request it, and emphasized the importance of comprehensive family counseling.
Sperm Donors
Donors expressed considerable confusion about the rationale behind age limits and consistently desired more information about their offspring.
Many described feeling perpetually "on hold," waiting for potential contact, while acknowledging that their needs often differed from those of donor-conceived people.
While donors generally found contact enriching when it occured, they noted that expectations didn't always align with reality. Many donors admited they didn't fully understand the future implications of donation at the time, and now expressed a desire for earlier information sharing.
They described navigating complex relationships with multiple offspring while also considering impacts on their own families, and consistently expressed a desire for better guidance about managing potential contact.
Counselors
Counselors observed that information needs vary significantly with age, noting that younger children require different types of support than teenagers. They emphasize how parents' roles become more significant with younger children, while observing how siblings' different needs often affect individual choices about information access. Counselors also identified age 16 as a particularly challenging time for information release.
They noted the lack of specialized psychological support available for adolescents and highlighted significant gaps in the system, particularly the need for comprehensive family counseling and long-term support beyond the initial information exchange.
Limitations: Focus only on sperm donation. Low representation of male donor-conceived participants and those from heterosexual parent families. Self-selection bias of participants. Only biological mothers were interviewed.
Applications:
Policymakers should consider removing rigid age limits for accessing donor information and creating a more flexible system that can respond to individual needs.
Mental health providers should provide specialized counseling for donor-conceived people of different ages, include whole family in counseling services, and create specific support for siblings with different needs.
Banks, clinics, and matching services should better prepare donors for future contact, provide ongoing support for donors and their families, and help donors understand their role in donor-conceived people's lives.
Note: The study has already influenced policy in the Netherlands. The Dutch Ministry of Health announced plans to remove age limits, moving toward a more individualized approach to information access.
Funding Source: Dutch funding agency ZonMw
Lead Author: Sophie Bolt, PhD, is a cultural anthropologist affiliated to Fiom, in the Netherlands. Her field of expertise lies in qualitative research methodology, and issues related to health, behaviour and culture. She is the project leader of several research projects about unintended pregnancy, kinship, motivation and donation.
Regulatory Context:
Artificial Fertilisation Donor Information Act (2004) abolished donor anonymity and defined how access to donor information is regulated.
A government-funded national register manages and makes donor information accessible.
There are age limits for accessing donor information. At birth, parents can request physical and social data from the donor in a "donor passport". At age 12, donor-conceived individuals can request the donor passport themselves. At 16, Donor-conceived individuals can request personally identifiable donor information (name, date of birth, residence).
Donors who donated before 2004 had the option to change their status to anonymous. For deceased donors who donated before 2004, next of kin are approached for consent to share information. For post-2004 donations, anonymous donation is prohibited and all donors must be identifiable
Counselling is provided to both donor-conceived individuals and donors during the information exchange process.
In most cases, identifiable donor information is shared with the donor-conceived individual by a counsellor. Often involves a meeting between the donor-conceived person and donor. If requested, a third party (e.g., parent or partner) can join at the end of the meeting.