P-055 Four decades of sperm donation: Motivation and attitudes among donors
Authors: Lassen E , Schiøler Kesmodel U , Bay B , Skytte A B 
Published: June 2023

Abstract

Study question
How has the attitudes and motivation towards donation among sperm donors developed through the years from 1992, 2002, and 2012 to 2022?

Summary answer
Altruism and economic compensation remain the primary motivations, but there are significant changes in responses for certain life and attitude-questions from current to previous years.

What is known already
The growing application of medically-assisted reproduction (MAR) has made treatment with donor sperm commonplace, and in recent years more people have been seeking pregnancy using donor sperm. With the global shortage of sperm donors, it is important to seek the opinion of the donor population on the perspectives of anonymity, motivations, information-sharing, and feelings towards the donor-conceived children, as well as the psychological factors related to being a donor. Previous studies have shown that altruism is the primary motivation and changing aspects of the donor population is of interest to all who seek to maintain the application of sperm donation.

Study design, size, duration
The study was based on the same questionnaire from the three preceding decades with a few updated modifications in the 2022-setup. Active sperm donors from the Danish sperm bank Cryos International were invited by email to participate in the study in the period June 9th to July 1st 2022. This is one of the largest studies of its kind to seek the opinion of sperm donors.

Participants/materials, setting, methods
Results from 173 donors were compared with previous answers from donors in the same sperm bank: 1992 (n = 39), 2002 (n = 58), and 2012 (n = 91). In 2012 and 2022, donors could choose between being ID-release (formerly known as non-anonymous) and non-ID-release (anonymous). Anonymized answers provided from the questionnaires were analyzed statistically to compare ID-groups and investigate changes in responses from previous surveys with the use of Chi-Squared tests and logistic regression.

Main results and the role of chance
There was a significant increase in the proportion of donors being ID-release from 29% in 2012 to 54% in 2022. The altruistic motivation of helping childless people was the most important factor to both ID-release donors and non-ID-release donors. Still, economic compensation was an invariable term of condition. In general in 2022, donors were willing to donate sperm to same-sex couples (80%) and single women (68%), and 55% were positive towards donation to transgender males. Logistic regression showed that ID-release donors were more likely to want information about donor offspring (OR = 1.80, [95% CI 1.02, 3.16]), while there was no association with having a partner. Also, a positive association between ID-release status and intending to inform current or future children about their sperm donation (OR = 1.73, 95% CI 1.10, 6.85) was observed. Having a partner was not significantly associated with the chance of donors wanting to inform current or future children about donations (OR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.90, 1.05). The findings of this study presented evidence that the donor population was not homogeneous in relation to several aspects of donation and had diverse opinions towards mutual information sharing.

Limitations, reasons for caution
The number of participants increased from 39 in 1992 to 173 in 2022. In 1992, donors who were not yet approved for donation were included, unlike the following years. All donors were anonymous in 1992 and 2002 due to legislation. Only in 2012 and 2022, donors could differentiate between ID-types.

Wider implications of the findings
The questionnaire clearly shows that the needs and attitudes of donors have developed across years. Different attitudes between ID-release and non-ID-release donors suggest that donor profiles fit people with different requirements. It is advisable to continually update provided services to fit the donors’ needs and opinions concerning mutual information.

Trial registration number
Not applicable