P-482 Construct validity of the donor conception identity questionnaire and its association with searching for and finding donor connections
Authors: Jadva V , Jones C , Zadeh S 
Published: July 2024

Study question

Is there an association between donor conception identity, psychological and social wellbeing, and searching for and finding donor connections?

Summary answer

Donor conceived individuals differ on key domains that tap into aspects of their donor conception identity. These relate to searching for and finding donor connections.

What is known already

There is variation in the ways that donor conceived individuals feel about their conception. Factors such as the age of disclosure are associated with how donor conceived individuals feel about being donor conceived. Associations have been found between donor conception identity and parent-child relationship quality among adolescents, suggesting that curiosity and negativity about donor conception are influenced by the valence of the parent-child relationship. The Donor Conception Identity Questionnaire (DCIQ) has not been previously validated.

Study design, size, duration

88 donor conceived adults in the UK participated in a cross-sectional study using an online multi-method survey. Data were collected between January and August 2022. The survey was advertised by the Donor Conception Network and Donor Conceived Register Registrants’ Panel via mailing lists and social media and circulated by the research team and others on social media and university mailing lists. The present findings draw from a subsection of the data collected from this survey.

Participants/materials, setting, methods

Most participants identified as female (n = 65,74%) and were conceived using donor sperm (n = 79,90%). Participants completed the 25-item DCIQ (adapted from studies of donor conception and adoption identity), and the Mental Health Continuum, the Satisfaction with Life Scale, and adapted versions of the community connectedness and pride subscales of the Gender Minority Stress and Resilience Measure and the HIV Stigma Scale. Participants reported on whether they had searched for and/or found donor connections.

Main results and the role of chance

Factor analysis of items on the DCIQ identified four domains: 1. Concern and centrality, 2. Internalised stigma, 3. Pride and acceptance, and 4. Openness and understanding. ‘Concern and centrality’ correlated positively with community connectedness (r(86)= 283, p=.008), and stigma (r(86)= 280, p= .008), and negatively with pride (r(86) =-.398, p&lt;.001). ‘Internalised stigma’ was positively correlated with stigma (r(86)=.858, p&lt;.001) and negatively correlated with psychological wellbeing (r(85)=-.378, p &lt;.001), satisfaction with life (r(86)= -.263, p=.013) and pride (r(86)=-716, p&lt;.001). ‘Pride and acceptance’ was positively correlated with psychological wellbeing (r(85) = .276, p = .010), satisfaction with life (r(86)=.329, p =.002) and pride (r(86)=.800, p&lt;.001), and negatively correlated with stigma (r(86)=-.396, p &lt;.001). ‘Openness and understanding’ was positively correlated with psychological wellbeing (r(85)=.304, p=.004), satisfaction with life (r(86)=.316, p=.003), and pride (r(86)=.584, p&lt;.001) and negatively correlated with stigma (r(86)=-.614, p&lt;.001).

Searchers scored higher than non-searchers on ‘concern and centrality’ F(1, 79) = 7.543, p= .007 and ‘internalised stigma’ (F(1, 79)=4.355, p=.040). Donor conceived individuals who had found donor connections scored lower on ‘internalised stigma’ F(1, 79) = 7.071, p=.009 and higher on ‘openness and understanding’ (F(1, 79)=6.083, p=0.016) compared to those who had not found their donor connections.

Limitations, reasons for caution

Lack of diversity within the sample with regards to participant gender, age, and donation type means that findings may not apply across donor conceived populations. The sample were self-selected. Causal relationships between variables cannot be established.

Wider implications of the findings

The DCIQ may be useful to understand variation in donor conceived people’s psychological health and interest in their donor. The value of the measure in a practical context (e.g., in counselling) should now be evaluated. Further work to validate the scale across different contexts and with different populations is recommended.

Trial registration number

the UK Economic and Social Research Council [New Investigator Award ES/S015426/1