Zadeh S, Jones C, Jadva V
School of Psychology, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.
Social, Genetic and Developmental Psychology Centre, King's College London, London, UK.
Hum Reprod. 2024 Dec 1;39(12):2722-2733. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deae210.
What are the experiences and outcomes of donor conceived adults who are actively searching for, open to contact with, or not searching for donor connections?
Most participants were actively searching or open to contact, and 67% had found or been found by a connection; finding or not finding experiences were complex.
There is variation among donor conceived individuals in their interest in donor connections. Individual reasons for searching for connections, and which donor connections are searched for, also vary. Most research studies have focussed on individuals who are actively searching for their donor or donor siblings. Global increases in direct-to-consumer DNA testing and social media participation mean that connections may be made to individuals unaware of their (or their relatives') involvement with donor conception. These social and technological changes have also increased the chances of donor conceived individuals being contacted without expecting or desiring contact.
STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This study included 88 donor conceived adults, in the UK, who participated in an online multi-method survey between January and August 2022. The survey was designed in consultation with staff and volunteers from the UK's largest community networks for donor conception families (Donor Conception Network, DCN) and donor conceived people (Donor Conceived Register Registrants' Panel, DCRRP). It was piloted by five donor conceived people before its launch. Participants were recruited with assistance from DCN and DCRRP, via social media, university mailing lists, and snowballing.
PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Participants were mostly female (n = 65, 74%) and sperm donor conceived (n = 79, 90%). Of the 88 participants, 39 (44%) were actively searching for their donor connections, 44 (50%) were open to contact but not actively searching, and 5 (6%) were not searching. Questions were closed (yes/no, rating scale, or multiple choice) or open-ended, addressing experiences of donor conception, searching for connections, and finding or not finding connections. Data were analysed both quantitatively and qualitatively.
Quantitative results showed no differences between the groups on any demographic variables or in when or how they found out about being donor conceived, and no differences between active searchers and those open to contact in whether they had found their donor connections. Significant differences were found between groups in their interest in their genetic history and the perceived importance of genetics to their sense of identity, with active searchers being more interested and rating this as more important than those open to contact. Methods of searching significantly differed across groups, with active searchers using genetic testing and social media more than those open to contact. 59 participants across all groups (active searchers (n = 29, 74%), open to contact (n = 27, 61%), not open to contact (n = 3, 60%)) had found or been found by a donor connection. Experiences of finding or not finding donor connections among participants actively searching or open to contact were captured by the theme complexities, with six subthemes: uncertainties in searching and relating; searching as open-ended; different donor connections, different experiences; expectations and realities; searching and finding or not finding as catalysing change; and experiences of other donor conceived people.
LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Most participants were members of relevant community organizations. As is common in research in this area, the sample was mostly female and conceived using donor sperm. Donor conceived people who are disinterested in donor connections may be unlikely to participate in research on this topic.
The nature and impact of the search process itself should be considered when developing appropriate mechanisms of support for all donor conceived people, regardless of whether they are actively searching for connections or not. Further research should seek to better understand how donor conceived people with varying levels of interest in searching for donor connections differ from one another.
STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study was funded by the UK Economic and Social Research Council [New Investigator Award ES/S015426/1]. The authors have no competing interests to declare.
N/A.
那些积极寻找、愿意与捐赠者建立联系或不寻求捐赠者联系的通过捐赠受孕的成年人有哪些经历和结果?
大多数参与者积极寻找或愿意建立联系,67%的人找到了或被找到;找到或未找到的经历很复杂。
通过捐赠受孕的个体对与捐赠者建立联系的兴趣存在差异。寻找联系的个人原因以及寻找哪些捐赠者联系也各不相同。大多数研究都集中在那些积极寻找其捐赠者或捐赠者兄弟姐妹的个体上。直接面向消费者的DNA检测和社交媒体参与度在全球范围内的增加意味着,可能会与那些不知道自己(或其亲属)参与过捐赠受孕的人建立联系。这些社会和技术变革也增加了通过捐赠受孕的个体在没有预期或渴望联系的情况下被联系的机会。
研究设计、规模、持续时间:本研究纳入了英国88名通过捐赠受孕的成年人,他们于2022年1月至8月参与了一项在线多方法调查。该调查是在与英国最大的捐赠受孕家庭社区网络(捐赠受孕网络,DCN)的工作人员和志愿者以及通过捐赠受孕的人群(捐赠受孕登记注册者小组,DCRRP)协商后设计的。在发布之前,由五名通过捐赠受孕的人进行了试点。参与者在DCN和DCRRP的协助下,通过社交媒体、大学邮件列表和滚雪球抽样的方式招募。
参与者/材料、设置、方法:参与者大多为女性(n = 65,74%),通过精子捐赠受孕(n = 79,90%)。在88名参与者中,39人(44%)积极寻找其捐赠者联系,44人(50%)愿意建立联系但未积极寻找,5人(6%)不寻求联系。问题为封闭式(是/否、评分量表或多项选择)或开放式,涉及捐赠受孕经历、寻找联系以及找到或未找到联系的情况。对数据进行了定量和定性分析