Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2024 Jul 1;30(4):488-527.
doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmae010.

Parents' disclosure to their donor-conceived children in the last 10 years and factors affecting disclosure: a narrative review

Affiliations
Review

Parents' disclosure to their donor-conceived children in the last 10 years and factors affecting disclosure: a narrative review

Michelle A Duff et al. Hum Reprod Update. .

Abstract

Background: Disclosure of donor conception has been advocated in several jurisdictions in recent years, especially in those that practice identity-release donation. However, research on disclosure decisions has not been consolidated systematically in the last 10 years to review if parents are telling and what factors may be impacting their decisions.

Objective and rationale: Are parents disclosing to their donor-conceived children, and what factors have influenced their disclosure decisions across different contexts and family forms in the last 10 years?

Search methods: A bibliographic search of English-language, peer-reviewed journal articles published between 2012 and 2022 from seven databases was undertaken. References cited in included articles were manually scrutinized to identify additional references and references that cited the included articles were also manually searched. Inclusion criteria were articles focused on parents (including heterosexual, single mothers by choice, same-sex couples, and transsexual) of donor-conceived persons in both jurisdictions with or without identity-release provisions. Studies focused solely on surrogacy, donors, donor-conceived persons, or medical/fertility staff were excluded as were studies where it was not possible to extract donor-recipient parents' data separately. Both quantitative and qualitative studies were included. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed and Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tools for Systematic Reviews were used to assess article quality and bias.

Outcomes: Thirty-seven articles met the inclusion criteria representing 34 studies and 4248 parents (including heterosexual, single, same-sex, and transsexual parents although the majority were heterosexual) from countries with anonymous donation and those with identity-release provisions or who had subsequently enacted these provisions (Australia, Belgium, Finland, France, Hong Kong, Middle East, Spain, Sweden, the UK, and the USA) A general trend towards disclosure was noted across these groups of parents with most disclosing to their donor-conceived children before the age of 10 years. Further, the majority of those who had not yet told, reported planning to disclose, although delayed decisions were also associated with lower disclosure overall. Same-sex and single parents were more likely to disclose than heterosexual parents. There was recognition of disclosure as a process involving ongoing conversations and that decisions were impacted by multiple interacting intrapersonal, interpersonal, and external contextual and social factors. Methodological limitations, such as the different population groups and contexts from which participants were drawn (including that those parents who choose not to disclose may be less likely to participate in research), are acknowledged in integrating findings.

Wider implications: This review has reinforced the need for a theoretical model to explain parents' disclosure decisions and research exploring the role of legislative provisions, culture, and donor/family type in decision-making. Greater ongoing access to psychological support around disclosure may be important to promote parent and family well-being.

Keywords: anonymous donation; embryo donation; gamete donation; identity-release; oocyte/egg donation; parental disclosure; sperm donation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

There are no competing interests to disclose.

Figures

Graphical Abstract
Graphical Abstract
Interwoven contextual factors influence parents’ disclosure decisions to their donor-conceived children, with an apparent trend towards greater and earlier disclosure noted between 2012 and 2022. ART-D, assisted reproductive technologies and donor gametes.
Figure 1.
Figure 1.
PRISMA flow diagram demonstrating the systematic search method for identification of articles on parents’ disclosure to their donor-conceived children for review. PRISMA, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses; JBI, Joanna Briggs Institute.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Applegarth LD, Kaufman NL, Josephs-Sohan M, Christos PJ, Rosenwaks Z.. Parental disclosure to offspring created with oocyte donation: intentions versus reality. Hum Reprod 2016;31:1809–1815. - PubMed
    1. Bauer TA. Systematic review of qualitative studies investigating motives and experiences of recipients of anonymous gamete donation. Front Sociol 2022;7:746847. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Beeson DR, Jennings PK, Kramer W.. Offspring searching for their sperm donors: how family type shapes the process. Hum Reprod 2011;26:2415–2424. - PubMed
    1. Best S, Goedeke S, Thorpe M.. Make our wellbeing a priority: donor-conceived adults call for ongoing support and conversation about their donor conception. Hum Fertil (Camb) 2023;26:337–346. - PubMed
    1. Blake L, Carone N, Slutsky J, Raffanello E, Ehrhardt A, Golombok S.. Gay father surrogacy families: relationships with surrogates and egg donors and parental disclosure of children’s origins. Fertil Steril 2016;106:1503–1509. - PMC - PubMed