A Hungarian study on preferences in solo motherhood
Single mothers by choice in Hungary: Motivations for solo motherhood and the importance of genetic ties. (Bognár, 2026)
Bognár, A., Herke, B., & Szalma, I. (2026). Single mothers by choice in Hungary: Motivations for solo motherhood and the importance of genetic ties. Human Fertility, 29(1), 2682158. https://doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2026.2682158
Geographic Region: Hungary
Research Question: What are the reproductive decisions and concept of kinship of single mothers by choice (SMBC) in Hungary who pursued motherhood through assisted reproductive technologies (ART)?
Design: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews, conducted between February and October 2025. Participants were recruited through social media groups, a nationwide online newspaper announcement, and snowball sampling. All interviews were conducted and analyzed in Hungarian; quotes used in the article were translated into English and checked by all three authors for accuracy of meaning.
Sample: 21 Hungarian women, aged 35 to 53, who became mothers between the ages of 35 and 51 through ART using donor gametes or embryos. Fifteen participants used sperm donation only; six conceived through double gamete donation (both donor egg and donor sperm) or embryo donation. Eleven participants underwent treatment exclusively in Hungarian clinics, six exclusively abroad, and four in both Hungary and another country (destinations included the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Spain, Portugal, Greece, and the United States). Most had one child; two had two children, and one had three. With one exception, all participants held tertiary degrees, and most described themselves as financially stable. Eligibility required at least one child conceived through ART using donor gametes or embryos, with the youngest child no older than 15; being legally single both at conception and at the time of the study; and living alone with the child(ren).
Editor’s Note: From 2010 to April 2026, Hungary was governed by a party that pursued explicitly pronatalist and "traditional family" policies (e.g., single-parent adoption was nearly impossible, ART was banned outright for same-sex couples). The authors caution against reading the study’s findings as a “natural” preference for genetic kinship. Two things can be true: Genetic connection appears to have mattered to these 21 women, and these feelings took shape within a context that centered the heteronormative nuclear family.
Key Findings
When asked about their reasons for pursuing becoming an SMBC, all 21 participants described a strong, longstanding desire to have a child. Most had originally hoped to have children within a partnership, and had either not found a suitable partner or had partners who did not want children. Participants described ART as a fallback plan rather than a first choice, taken up as they approached the end of their reproductive years. Several said they waited “until the last moment” in case a partner appeared. Some participants also described valuing the independence and autonomy of parenting alone, such as avoiding parenting conflicts and making child-rearing decisions on their own.
When asked why they pursued ART rather than adoption, participants described Hungarian laws that make adoption by single people extremely difficult, alongside the perceived challenges of parenting an older child with a prior care history, as reasons for preferring ART.
When asked about the role of genetic relatedness, most participants attached strong importance to conceiving with their own eggs, and several attempted this against medical advice, even when clinics recommended a donor egg. Participants who conceived using donor eggs or embryos often emphasized carrying the pregnancy and giving birth themselves as a form of biological connection, and some described choosing donor embryos partly for physical resemblance (e.g., matching eye or hair color) as a way of approximating a genetic tie. Several participants described more difficulty explaining to their child that they were not genetically related (in cases of egg or embryo donation) than explaining that the genetic father was a donor.
Most participants in Hungary could not choose an identity-release donor because Hungarian law excludes this option entirely. Among those who expressed a preference, most said they would have preferred identity-release donation, reasoning that it would benefit their child’s ability to learn about their origins. Several participants described more difficulty explaining to their child that they were not a genetic parent (in cases of egg or embryo donation) than explaining that they used a sperm donor.
When asked about the donor and searching for genetic relatives, most participants expressed a neutral or grateful attitude toward the donor. Few had actively tried to identify an anonymous donor; several described this as something they would leave for their child to decide as an adult, or as ethically uncomfortable given the donor’s original choice of anonymity. There was more agreement that searching for donor-conceived half-siblings was worthwhile. Most participants attempted this, and several succeeded, primarily through Facebook groups and international sperm bank sibling registries. Motivations included curiosity, a desire to support their child’s identity development, and a wish to build extended family-like networks.
Limitations: Recruitment through social media groups, an online newspaper announcement, and snowball sampling likely favored women already connected to online communities and already comfortable discussing donor conception. The sample was relatively small and consisted of highly educated, financially stable heterosexual women, which may limit the generalizability of the findings.
Implications: Any research conducted in a constrained-choice environment tells you as much about the environment as it does about the psychology.
Funding Source: University of Pécs (Rectoral Application Grant No. 009_2025_PTE_RK/5, awarded to Adrienn Bognár) and Momentum Programme of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (Grant LENDULET_2021-78)
Lead Author: Adrienn Bognár is an associate professor of sociology at the University of Pécs, Hungary, where she also earned her PhD in the social sciences. No personal connection to donor conception is disclosed in the article.
Regulatory Context
Identity-release (identifiable) donation is legally excluded for both sperm and egg donation; only limited non-identifying information (physical characteristics, screening results) may be shared with recipients.
Since the late 1990s, publicly funded ART, including up to six insemination cycles and five IVF cycles, is available to single women under 45 if natural conception is considered unlikely, generally requiring confirmation from at least two independent medical opinions. Assisted reproduction, including sperm donation, is completely unavailable to same-sex female couples in Hungary.
Altruistic sperm donation is compensated for expenses. Financial compensation for egg donation is not permitted. Egg donation inside Hungary is limited to altruistic, non-commercial donations from a close female relative under 35 who has already given birth.
Since 2020 legislative changes, adoption by single people has become extremely difficult: ministerial approval is required, and single applicants may adopt only when no married couple wishes to adopt the child.
There is no legal requirement for parents to disclose donor conception to children, though the child’s medical records include this information and are accessible to the child as an adult.
Related Posts
A case study reveals how one young donor-conceived person in Turkey navigates family identity (Özden, 2025)
Research shows Italian society split on acceptance of donor-conceived families (Fusco, 2025)
Study reveals how medical practitioners’ conceptual frameworks restrict access to donor treatments (Lindgren, 2025)