Egg donors choosing identity-release donation show greater openness to future contact with offspring
Egg donors' attitudes toward identifiability, offspring information, and genetic testing. (Lassen, 2025)
Lassen, E., Lemmen, J. G., Pennings, G., & Skytte, A. B. (2025). Egg donors' attitudes toward identifiability, offspring information, and genetic testing. Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, 23(81). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12958-025-01418-8
Geographic Region: United States
Research Question: What are the differences in attitudes between identity-release and non-identity-release egg donors regarding identifiability, information about donor-conceived offspring, and genetic testing preferences?
Design: Cross-sectional study with an online questionnaire administered from July to September 2023. The 36-question survey covered demographics, motivation for donation, attitudes toward anonymity, attitudes toward donor-conceived offspring and contact, attitudes toward genetic testing, and psychological aspects.
Sample: 39 egg donors (27 identity-release, 12 non-identity-release) from 269 invited current and past donors at Cryos International in the United States, yielding a 14.5% response rate. Participants had a mean age of 27 years, with a mean age at first donation of 23 years. Most donors had partners (70% of ID-release and 83% of non-identity-release donors). All donors with partners stated that their partner knew about their donation and had positive feelings about it. At the time of their first donation, 22% of identity-release donors had children, compared to 0% of non-identity-release donors. Identity-release donors comprised 69% of participants, while non-identity-release donors made up 31%. Recruitment involved email invitations sent to all eligible donors with two reminder emails.
Key Findings
Helping childless couples was the primary motivation for most egg donors, with 85% of identity-release donors and 92% of anonymous donors citing this reason, showing no significant difference between the two groups. Financial compensation was also important for most donors, with 74% of identity-release donors and 67% of anonymous donors considering this a motivating factor, though no donor said they donated only for money. Some ID-release donors were motivated by helping family or friends (48%), while fewer non-ID-release donors cited this reason (25%).
Donors who chose to be identifiable cared more about the parents who would receive their eggs, with 44% considering the parents' interests compared to only 8% of anonymous donors. (statistically significant finding)
Identity-release donors were more likely to think about the children who might be born from their donation, with 78% reporting this compared to 42% of anonymous donors. (approaching statistical significance). A greater proportion of identity-release donors (85%) expressed interest in receiving information about the children born from their donation than non-identity-release donors (58%).
Anonymous donors prioritized their privacy more, with 17% citing this as important compared to 4% of identity-release donors, and were more likely to feel regret about their donation (25% vs 4%).
Both groups strongly supported genetic testing and extended carrier screening, with 93% of identity-release donors and 83% of anonymous donors favoring testing.
Identity-release donors were much more open to future contact with donor-conceived children. While none of the identity-release donors wished to avoid contact, 25% of non-identity-release donors did. When asked about potentially being contacted by a DCP, 93% of identity-release donors believed the situation would work out fine, compared to 75% of non-identity-release donors.
The two groups had very different views about how children should learn about their donor conception, with 70% of identity-release donors believing children should be able to discover this through databases compared to only 17% of anonymous donors, while 75% of anonymous donors believed only parents should reveal this information. These findings were statistically significant.
Limitations: The survey had a low response rate, raising questions about potential non-response bias and limiting the generalizability of findings.
Applications: Understanding that donor attitudes vary significantly by anonymity type may help set appropriate expectations for potential contact and understand donor motivations.
Funding Source: This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Lead Author; Emilie Lassen is affiliated with Cryos International Sperm & Egg Bank in Denmark. No information about personal connection to donor conception was provided.
Regulatory Context
There are no comprehensive federal laws regulating gamete donation or donor conception in the U.S. The process is largely self-regulated by the fertility industry.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does have some oversight, primarily related to the screening and testing of donors for infectious diseases.
The American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) provides ethical guidelines and recommendations for donation practices. However, these are not legally binding.
There are no legal limits on compensation for donors. A 2011 court ruling (Kamakahi v. ASRM) determined that price caps on donor compensation violate antitrust laws.
ASRM recommends a minimum age of 21 for gamete donors, but this is not legally mandated.
The U.S. does not have laws prohibiting anonymous donations.
Some states have enacted their own laws regarding aspects of assisted reproduction and parentage, but these vary widely.
Related Posts