Experiences and attitudes of Danish men who were sperm donors more than 10 years ago; a qualitative interview study

• Published in: PloS one Vol. 18; no. 2; p. e0281022
• Main Authors: Lou, Stina, Bollerup, Stina, Terkildsen, Morten Deleuran, Adrian, Stine Willum, Pacey, Allan, Pennings, Guido, Vogel, Ida, Skytte, Anne-Bine
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Public Library of Science 15-02-2023; Public Library of Science (PLoS)
• Subjects: Altruism; Analysis; Attitude; Attitudes; Biology and Life Sciences; Committees; Consent; Denmark; Economic aspects; Fatherhood; Health aspects; Health risks; Humans; Infertility; Interviews; Male; Medical research; Medicine and Health Sciences; Offspring; Privacy; Research and Analysis Methods; Research ethics; Semen; Social aspects; Social Sciences; Sperm; Sperm donations; Sperm donors; Spermatozoa; Tissue Donors; Denmark
• ISSN: 1932-6203; 1932-6203
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0281022

More knowledge about the long-term impact of sperm donation is essential as the donor's attitude towards donation may change over time. Personal and social developments may prompt a rethinking of previous actions and decisions, or even regret. Thus, the aim of this study was to explore the experiences and attitudes of men who were sperm donors more than 10 years ago.
From May to September 2021, semi-structured, qualitative interviews were conducted with 23 former donors (> 10 years since last donation) from Cryos International sperm bank. Two participants were non-anonymous donors and 21 were anonymous. The interviews were conducted by phone or via video (mean 24 minutes). All interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and rendered anonymous. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis.
The analysis showed that most men had been donors for monetary and altruistic purposes, and now considered sperm donation as a closed chapter that was 'unproblematic and in the past'. Most men valued anonymity and emphasized the non-relatedness between donor and donor conceived offspring. Knowledge about recipients and donor offspring was seen as 'damaging' as it could create unwanted feelings of relatedness and responsibility towards them. All men acknowledged donor conceived persons' potential interests in knowing about their genetic heritage in order to understand appearance and personal traits, but also emphasized the donors' rights to anonymity. Potential breach of anonymity was generally considered 'highly problematic' as it was expected to disturb their families and force a relationship on them.
This study reports on former donors who might not have volunteered for research due to lack of interest or protection of privacy. The majority of men valued anonymity and clearly demarcated a line between sperm donation and fatherhood, which was enforced by not knowing about the donor offspring or recipients.