Most egg donors tell partners and friends but only half tell their own children
A Mixed-Methods Examination of the Experiences and Emotional Responses of Oocyte Donors About Disclosing Their Donation to Their Family, Friends, and Children (Adlam, 2025)
Adlam, K., Koenig, M. D., Patil, C., Steffen, A., Salih, S., Kramer, W., & Hershberger, P. (2025). O-169 A mixed-methods examination of the experiences and emotional responses of oocyte donors about disclosing their donation to their family, friends, and children. Human Reproduction, 40(Supplement_1). https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deaf097.169
Geographic Region: United States
Research Question: What is the experience and emotional impact of oocyte donors regarding disclosing or not disclosing their donation to their family, friends, and children?
Design: A cross-sectional, mixed-methods study that combined quantitative and qualitative data from an online survey. Data was collected over 4 weeks in June 2021. The study used descriptive statistics for quantitative data analysis and content analysis to identify themes and subthemes from qualitative responses.
Sample: The study included 344 oocyte donors recruited from the Donor Sibling Registry email list and Facebook groups. Participants had donated an average of 3.3 times per person, with 77% using non-identified (anonymous) donation and 82% donating as non-directed (to unknown recipients). The sample was predominantly white (93%), with 59% married and 56% having children of their own.
Key Findings
Most participants reported not having contact with recipient parents (74%) or donor offspring (84%).
81% of donors disclosed to partners, parents, and friends, but only 51% disclosed to their own children.
Of the 26% who contacted their donor offspring, 56% also disclosed their donation to their own children.
The most common way for donors to contact their donor offspring was through DNA testing sites (35%).
The three most common emotions experienced during disclosure were pride, excitement, and joy, supported by both quantitative and qualitative data.
Four main themes emerged from qualitative responses about disclosure impact: no impact (154 participants), positive impact (130 participants), mixed impact (26 participants), and negative impact (23 participants). Positive impact subthemes included pride, sharing information to educate and raise awareness, feeling supported, creating new family bonds, and forming an identity.
Limitations: The study relied heavily on participants from the Donor Sibling Registry, who already had an interest in connecting with donor offspring, which may not represent all egg donors. Non-identified donors made up 77% of the sample, which may not reflect current trends toward identity-release donation. Conference abstract format limits detail.
Applications: Counselors should be prepared to help donors navigate disclosure decisions with their own children, as this appears to be more challenging than disclosing to adult family and friends.
Funding Source: Not specified in the abstract.
Lead Author: Kirby Adlam is a Clinical Assistant Professor at the University of Illinois Chicago College of Nursing, where she has taught in BSN, master's, and DNP programs since 2014. She is a certified nurse-midwife (CNM) with extensive clinical experience working in underserved communities in Chicago and focuses her research on infertility, third-party reproduction, and traumatic birth experiences using social justice and reproductive justice frameworks. No personal connection to donor conception was disclosed.
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
Egg donors' evolving views on anonymity and contact (Holley, 2024)
Egg donor perspectives on genetic connections (Tammi, 2024)