Sperm donors – emerging from the shadows
The voice of the sperm donor is
often the one less heard in debates on donor
conception. In relation to the issue of anonymity and possible
removal of that anonymity the donor's views are often the subject of conjecture,
assumption and assertion. But are
those assumptions right? For the most part I think not.
Members of the medical profession
and others are often quick to assert the importance of the anonymity which
donors were (apparently) promised in the 1970’s and 80s when there was
significant expansion of donor conception practices in
Australia. Typical examples of such
assertions can be seen here http://www.theage.com.au/comment/allow-sperm-donors-the-right-to-maintain-their-past-anonymity-20130507-2j5o4.html and here http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/why-the-promise-to-sperm-donors-must-be-honoured-20120410-1wmus.html
Recently and
increasingly sperm donors are speaking up for themselves – and for the most part
they reject the notion that they wish to hide behind veils of anonymity. I am a member of that group of former
donors who are speaking up.
See for example this piece http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/father-figures-20111112-1ncxt.html which in turn encouraged other former
donors to make contact with me.
Peter Liston is one such – a piece featuring an interview with him here
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/sperm-donor-steps-up-for-offspring-who-want-to-know-20121208-2b2ej.html
and a piece on which Peter and I collaborated here http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/allow-our-donor-children-to-know-their-heritage/story-fni0ffsx-1226679227163
From these connections with former
donors a group has evolved – the Melbourne Anonymous Donors (MADMen). Using that group as the base I
recently undertook a small research study exploring the views of sperm
donors. That has now been published
in a special – donor conception focused - edition of the Australian Journal of
Adoption http://www.nla.gov.au/openpublish/index.php/aja/issue/current.
I interviewed seven former donors
from the 1970s and 80s. Key issues
explored included:
- Motivations for being a donor
- Did donors give informed consent?
- Their thoughts of the children born
- The issue of anonymity – was it promised or imposed?
- Contact – actual or potential
- What name to use for sperm donors?
- Attitudes to proposed changes to Victorian legislation to remove anonymity for pre-1988 donors.
- Reflections and observations on being a sperm donor – with the benefit of hindsight, would they do it again?
While the sample in this study is
small, it nonetheless opens a window to an area that has until now been largely
shrouded in mystery and thus open to the kind of assertions by and from the
medical fraternity which are noted at the beginning of this post. The interviews demonstrate that – at
least for this group – the children fathered are far from forgotten. Rather these men think actively of
them and hope to meet and know their offspring (and in some cases have achieved
that. Far from being a fearful of the removal of anonymity the past sperm
donors whose views are reported here will welcome and embrace such change.
The full article: “Sperm donors – moving out of the shadows. Contact and connection
between former sperm donors and their offspring - experiences and perspectives”
is worth a read. You can find
it here: http://www.nla.gov.au/openpublish/index.php/aja/article/view/3061/3607
I welcome comment and questions on this topic: iwsmith@netspace.net.au
Ian.