Adolescents describe what it's like to request information about their sperm donor
Donor-conceived adolescents accessing donor information in The Netherlands: their needs, motivations, experiences and available support. (Maas, 2026)
Maas, A. J. B. M., de Kever, G. M. M., van den Boom, L., & Bolt, S. H. (2026). Donor-conceived adolescents accessing donor information in The Netherlands: their needs, motivations, experiences and available support. Human Fertility, 29(1), 2646883. https://doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2026.2646883
Geographic Region: The Netherlands
Research Question: What are the motivations, needs, and experiences of donor-conceived adolescents in the Netherlands when seeking sperm donor information and making contact?
Study Design: Semi-structured in-depth interviews conducted in two rounds of recruitment: June 2021 and August-September 2022. Participants were asked to reflect on their experiences during adolescence, broadly defined as ages 10–24. New themes emerging from earlier interviews were incorporated into later interview guides, consistent with iterative qualitative methods.
Sample: 19 donor-conceived individuals participated across 18 interviews. In one interview, a mother also participated; in another, two mothers participated alongside their donor-conceived son and daughter. The average age was 22.6 years, ranging from 17 to 26 years. Participants were predominantly female (n=16; 84%). Family structures included single-mother families (n=11; 58%), mother-father families (n=4; 21%), and mother-mother families (n=4; 21%). All participants had an identifiable sperm donor. Disclosure of donor conception occurred from birth for most participants (n=15; 79%). One participant was not told until age 21. The majority began their donor search between ages 16 and 17 (n=11; 58%). At the time of the study, 14 of the 19 participants had made contact with their donor, and 12 had had contact with donor siblings. Nearly all participants (n=16) received counseling from a Fiom counselor during the information exchange process. Purposive and snowball sampling were used, with recruitment through Fiom’s social media, newsletter, website, and direct email to people already in Fiom’s counseling system.
Key Findings
Curiosity about donor information ranged widely, from little to none to deep and enduring preoccupation. Some participants integrated their donor conception into their identity from an early age with minimal urgency for further information, while others experienced intense curiosity beginning in early childhood.
Most participants were interested in the donor’s personality (questions such as, ‘Who is he?’, ‘What kind of man is he?’, ‘What does he look like?’, ‘What characteristics does he have?’, ‘Why did he donate?’, ‘Where is he from?’, ‘What interests and hobbies does he have?’) and his medical history.
The approach of the age-16 access threshold heightened awareness and desire among many participants: the legal right to request information became a more prominent thought, even for those who had not previously been curious.
“Around the age of 14 or 15, I started thinking about the donor more as the time to make the request got closer. I was just really curious.” - Liam, 21 (single mother family)
“‘I told my parents, ‘It’s allowed at sixteen, so I really want to do it then’.” - Maud, 17 (mother-mother family)
The decision to seek donor information was rarely purely internal. Siblings’ curiosity often catalyzed or accelerated others’ searches. Parents frequently shared in or initiated the process, and some participants delayed their search out of loyalty to parents or fear of causing distress. Broader societal influences (e.g., television programs featuring donor-conceived people searching for their donors) could make the idea feel possible and open conversations within families. Two participants also feared that the donor might die before contact.
For many participants, receiving information about the donor and recognizing shared physical traits, personality characteristics, or interests contributed to their emerging self-image. Several participants also described a fully settled sense of identity prior to receiving information about the donor.
The relationship with the donor varied enormously: from a single meeting out of curiosity, to occasional contact at significant life events, to close ongoing personal relationships. None of the participants described the donor as a father figure, though some formed meaningful bonds (e.g., mentorship, friend).
Many participants described challenges in establishing contact with the donor, including a lack of shared history that made interactions feel awkward, uncertainty about the donor’s expectations, and practical factors like geographical distance. Some participants encountered concerning donor behaviors, including donors who shared private information without consent, expressed extreme views, or had psychological difficulties that complicated or made contact unsafe.
Many participants expressed that their curiosity about donor siblings was stronger than their curiosity about the donor himself. Donor siblings were seen as a potential extension of their social network, people who could offer shared experience and recognition, particularly for those who grew up without siblings. At the same time, the prospect of having large numbers of unknown genetic relatives and the possibility of inadvertently meeting a donor sibling in romantic or social contexts were sources of anxiety and ongoing distress for some participants.
“It would be so nice to have a lot of siblings, because I don’t have any myself. I thought about that a lot. At school, I would hear others talking about their brothers and sisters and think, ‘Maybe I’ll have them too.’” - Elise, 25 (mother-father family)
“It’s complicated because there are probably people who have half your DNA and are your age. You could easily meet them while dating or through friends. The idea of meeting someone and only finding out later that they are your sibling is scary to me.” - Tessa, 23 (mother-mother family)
“I find the subject of half-brothers and sisters difficult; I’d rather not think about it. After all, my family is complicated enough as it is, with brothers, sisters, stepbrothers and stepsisters.” - Emma, 19 (mother-mother family)
Almost all participants received Fiom counseling, and most valued it highly. They appreciated empathetic, personalized support, a step-by-step approach, and counselors who allowed them to proceed at their own pace without pressure. Participants particularly valued having control over the process and retaining agency to decide if and when to request information or make contact. Some participants felt that counseling support did not keep pace with the complexity of evolving donor sibling networks, particularly when group dynamics became complicated.
Participants suggested that family support played an important role. Parents who showed active interest, listened without judgment, and encouraged their children’s autonomy helped normalize the topic over time. In many families, parents sometimes initiated conversations or information seeking themselves rather than waiting for children to ask. Most parents were open to their children making contact with the donor and donor siblings, accompanied them to meetings, and provided practical and financial support.
“My parents had a little book that explained everything in simple language, and they would read it to me from time to time. So, ever since I became aware of my existence - ever since I knew I was alive - I also knew that I was a donor-conceived child.” - Annabelle, 19 (mother-father family)
“My parents’ support was valuable. We did it as a family. Although it was about my sister and me, my parents were involved in everything and knew everything.” - Tessa, 23 (mother-mother family)
Limitations: Three of the 19 participants were outside the 10–24 age range used to define adolescence in this study, meaning their experiences were captured only retrospectively. The study focused exclusively on sperm donation; findings may not apply to those conceived with egg or embryo donation. Participants were predominantly female (84%), which the authors note aligns with research suggesting kinship work is primarily done by women, but limits the representation of male donor-conceived people’s experiences. Single-mother families were overrepresented (58%), which may limit the range of family dynamics reflected. The study may be affected by self-selection bias, overrepresenting people with strong interest in their genetic background, though the authors note that one participant specifically joined to represent those who did not want donor contact. Families who avoided disclosure, had difficult experiences, or never sought professional support are absent. The research team is based at Fiom, the same organization whose counseling services are evaluated in the study.
Editor’s Note: The authors conclude that early disclosure is associated with lower urgency regarding donor information; however, I think this is a reach for a small, self-selected sample from a qualitative study.
Applications: The findings validate that curiosity about donors and donor siblings is normal, varied, and evolving. Donor-conceived people who feel little interest are not unusual, and those with intense curiosity from an early age are also not unusual. Participants valued personalized, empathetic, and responsive counseling that matched their individual timing, not a fixed process with predetermined steps. The complexity of growing donor sibling networks appears to exceed what individual counseling is currently designed to handle. Support that addresses group processes, not just individual ones, may be needed. Professionals should be alert to the range of donor behaviors that can arise, including donors who are unsafe, who have not disclosed their donation to their own partners, or who have significant psychological difficulties. Preparing young people for the possibility that contact may not go as hoped is important, but should be done in a way that does not pre-emptively dampen genuine excitement.
Funding Source: ZonMw (project number 554002007) as part of a broader research program on age limits in the Dutch Donor Data Act, commissioned by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport
Lead Author: A. Janneke B. M. Maas is a Senior Specialist in Policy and Researcher in Donor Conception at Fiom in ‘s-Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands. She holds a PhD in Developmental Psychology from Tilburg University, with her dissertation focused on prenatal influences on infant development and parent-infant relationships. No personal connection to donor conception was disclosed.
Regulatory Context:
The Netherlands abolished donor anonymity through the Artificial Fertilisation Donor Information Act (Wdkb) in 2004. Under this law, all donations made after 2004 must be identifiable.
From birth, parents can request a ‘donor passport’ containing the donor’s physical and social characteristics. Donor-conceived individuals can request this passport themselves at age 12. At age 16, they gain the right to access identifying information, including the donor’s name, date of birth, and place of residence.
The national donor register (College donorgegevens kunstmatige bevruchting, or Cdkb) is government-funded and manages all donor records.
Fiom is contracted by the Cdkb to provide counseling to donor-conceived people and donors during information exchange and contact processes. Contact between donor-conceived people and donors is not a legal right; it requires mutual consent.
For donations made before 2004, donors who previously donated under anonymity had the option to register in the voluntary Fiom KID-DNA Database and release their identity. Donors who donated before 2004 and died without changing their status cannot release information; in those cases, next of kin may be approached.
All forms of gamete donation in the Netherlands must be altruistic; commercial trading of gametes is prohibited. Counseling is provided to both donors and recipients. The Netherlands permits access to assisted reproduction for heterosexual couples, lesbian couples, and single women.
Related Posts