Beliefs about genetics influence how people respond to unexpected donor connections through DNA testing
Relational dynamite: Engagements with kinship at the interface of donor conception and DNA testing. (Nordqvist, 2025)
Nordqvist, P., Gilman, L., Redhead, C., Fox, M., Hudson, N., MacCallum, F., & Frith, L. (2025). Relational dynamite: Engagements with kinship at the interface of donor conception and DNA testing. Social Science & Medicine, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.11835
Geographic Region: United Kingdom
Research Question: How do people impacted by donor conception respond to DNA matches, and what factors influence whether they embrace or reject these new genetic connections?
Design: A qualitative interview study conducted as part of the ConnecteDNA study between 2021-2025. The researchers conducted 60 in-depth qualitative interviews remotely via video call or telephone, with the majority of interviews lasting around 90 minutes. The interviews followed a loosely chronological framework, beginning with participants' journey to donation or donor conception and their memories of growing up, before progressing to discuss their knowledge and thoughts about donor conception, views on DNA testing, and its effects on their lives and relationships. The research team used thematic and narrative analysis approaches, examining both the details of participants' experiences and the narrative frameworks used by participants.
Sample: 60 participants comprising 19 donors (sperm, egg, or embryo), 25 donor-conceived people, 20 individual parents through donor conception, and 2 relatives of donors, with 5 participants occupying more than one role. Participants were self-selecting, having responded to advertisements sent via support organizations and social media groups targeting donor-conceived individuals, their parents, and donors. Inclusion criteria required participants to be aged over 18 years (16 years for donor-conceived people), able to converse in English, and have a connection to the UK. The sample achieved diversity across donation type (anonymous or identity-release), gender, age, family structure, and educational attainment. Of the 60 participants, 41 had commissioned direct-to-consumer genetic testing, and 31 had matched with a donor connection, with several others in the process of seeking clarity on a match. The majority of participants referenced sperm donation, with a smaller proportion discussing egg and embryo donation. The majority identified as white, all but two of the parents were cis-women, and none of the participating donors had actively rejected or declined contact from someone conceived from their donation.
Key Findings
People's responses to DNA matches exist on a continuum from enthusiastic "embrace" at one end to complete "reject" at the other, with many falling somewhere in the middle.
DNA testing can create what the authors call "accelerated kinship" - sudden, sometimes intense, connections with genetic strangers that feel distinctly different from typical family relationships, which develop gradually over time through shared experiences.
How people respond to the DNA matches depends heavily on their existing family relationships and beliefs about genetics. The authors identified six key factors that influence responses: people's beliefs about whether genetic connections automatically create family bonds (ontology), feelings of belonging within their current family, the quality of their existing relationships, emotions around family and genetics, power dynamics within families, and how relationships have developed over time. These factors combine in unique ways within each family, creating different "recipes" that shape how family members will likely react to a DNA match.
A critical finding was the existence of what the researchers call a "genetic nexus", a particular cultural belief system where some people view genetic connections as automatically creating family relationships, which then determines who belongs in the family and who doesn't. This belief system can create powerful emotional responses, both positive and negative, when new genetic connections are discovered. People with this mindset may view DNA matches as either wonderful additions to the family or serious threats to existing relationships. The authors emphasize that this represents one way of understanding family among many possible approaches, not a universal truth about genetics and kinship.
The authors use the term "relational dynamite" to describe how a single DNA match can potentially disrupt multiple relationships within a family system. For example, even when someone wants to embrace a donor connection, they may keep it secret if they fear other family members will react poorly. The research showed that it only takes one suspected negative response within a family for a match to create significant relationship tensions.
Many people who enthusiastically embrace donor connections still maintain some level of rejection by keeping these relationships separate from their existing families. The research documented cases where people engaged in elaborate secret-keeping to protect family members from knowledge they feared would be harmful.
Contact with donor connections often transforms them from abstract ideas into real people with names, faces, and recognizable family traits. Several participants described how seeing photos of donor relatives made the genetic connection feel undeniable and more emotionally charged. This transformation from concept to reality often intensified both positive and negative responses to the connections.
The authors found that people must navigate between two very different types of family relationships: their established "born and bred" kinship built through years of shared experiences, and new "accelerated kinship" with genetic strangers. This creates complex decisions about how much energy and emotion to invest in new connections while protecting existing relationships. These decisions are rarely made in isolation, but are instead heavily influenced by family dynamics and fears about how others will react.
"Oh my God, please don't let it be him" - Lisa's reaction upon learning her donor's identity, fearing he might be someone already known to her.
"I love the fact that they are mine" - Mickey, a donor describing his enthusiasm for connecting with donor offspring.
"I'm completely excluded. [...] That's what I don't like" - Angela describing her feelings about her husband's donor offspring connections.
Limitations: Majority of participants referenced sperm donation with smaller representation of egg/embryo donation. Participants predominantly identified as white. All but two parents were cis-women. No participating donors had actively rejected contact attempts. Self-selecting sample may over-represent those comfortable discussing donor conception. Study limited to UK context with English-speaking participants.
Applications: All parties can benefit from understanding that varied responses to contact are normal and relationally embedded. Mental health professionals can offer support for managing "accelerated kinship" dynamics for all parties.
Funding Sources: UK Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC)
Lead Author: Petra Nordqvist is a sociologist at the University of Manchester studying kinship, reproductive technologies, and family formation. Her research examines how assisted reproductive technologies shape contemporary family life and relationships. No personal connection to donor conception is disclosed.
Regulatory Context
The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) is the UK's independent regulator overseeing fertility treatment and research using human embryos.
In 2005, the UK changed its laws regulating gamete donation from anonymous donation to identifiable donation.
As of October 2023, donor-conceived people conceived on or after April 1, 2005, can access information about their donor's identity and request information about the identity of any donor siblings who have also expressed interest in contact at age 18.
Those conceived before the law change in 2005 do not have the same legal right to identifying information about their donors, who were guaranteed anonymity at the time of donation.
The UK has a voluntary register called the Donor Conceived Register (DCR), which allows donors and donor-conceived people from before 2005 to voluntarily register and potentially match with each other.
Related Posts