New Zealand parents support early disclosure to donor-conceived children but worry about long-term wellbeing and stigma.
Donor Identity in Aotearoa New Zealand: Parents' experiences of donor conception and disclosure in New Zealand. (Anderson, 2025)
Anderson, K., Goedeke, S., Bertrand, S., Hamilton, R., Snelling, J., Ahuriri-Driscoll, A., Wakeman, S., & Farquhar, C. (2025). Donor Identity in Aotearoa New Zealand: A survey of parents regarding disclosure of donor conception to their donor-conceived children. Fertility and Sterility. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2025.07.1221
Anderson, K., Goedeke, S., Bertrand, S., & Farquhar, C. (2025). P-540 Donor Identity in Aotearoa New Zealand: Parents’ experiences of donor conception and disclosure in New Zealand. Human Reproduction, 40(Supplement_1). https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deaf097.846
Geographic Region: New Zealand (Aotearoa)
Research Question: To what extent are parents disclosing donor conception to their children in New Zealand, and what are their experiences of the disclosure process following the introduction of identity-release legislation?
Design: A cross-sectional survey study conducted over a 6-week period beginning in June 2024. The researchers used an anonymous online survey that included both fixed-response items and free-text response sections to gather quantitative and qualitative data. The study employed thematic analysis to examine the qualitative responses from the free-text portions of the survey.
Sample: A total of 374 parents completed the survey about their oldest eligible donor-conceived child, representing a 28% response rate among the eligible population. The eligible population consisted of parents of 1,528 children born through clinic-based sperm, egg, or embryo donation in New Zealand between 2006 and 2016 with children ages 7-18 years old. Parents were identified and recruited through the central register for donor-conceived births. The families' structures included two-parent heterosexual families (55%), single parents (25%), and two-parent lesbian families (14%). Participants were highly educated (67% university-educated) and predominantly New Zealand European/other European (89%). Regarding donation characteristics, 64% had used sperm donation, 33% egg donation, and 3% embryo donation. Half (51%) used clinic-recruited donors, while 38% used known donors.
Key Findings
86% of parents had already disclosed to their child. Gay/lesbian couples disclosed at the highest rates (96%), followed by single parents (89%) and heterosexual couples (82%). 12% planned to disclose in the future, and 3% planned not to disclose or were uncertain.
The average age at disclosure was 6.6 years, with a median age of 8 years.
85% of all parents had told their child the donor was identifiable. This rate was higher (94%) when the donor was a family member or friend. 12% of all parents had not yet told but planned to reveal this information, and 2% planned not to reveal donor identifiability or were uncertain about it.
Parents were asked about their comfort with the disclosure process: 75% were very comfortable or positive about the process; 17% were somewhat comfortable or positive; 14% had mixed feelings; and less than 1% were uncomfortable or distressed.
56% of parents “some” or “many” concerns about their decision to disclose. Parents expressed concern about losing emotional connection with their child ("losing a bit of our connection"), being seen as "not his real mother", the child treating them differently or loving them less, family cohesion ("risk of losing the closeness of our family unit"), and ongoing stigma ("There's still a lot of stigma in New Zealand about donation").
Parents were asked how their children reacted to disclosure. 31% said their children reacted positively, 43% neutrally, and 25% had mixed or negative reactions. The age at disclosure was not significantly associated with negative reactions, which contradicts other research suggesting early disclosure typically leads to neutral or curious responses.
71% of parents who disclosed had not received professional support, and 83% felt they didn't need it. Of those who did receive support, 82% accessed it from clinic counselors and 79% accessed support prior to conception, not around disclosure time. Post-donation support was viewed as minimal but important for family support, donor linking, and accessing updated donor information.
Parents were asked about their motivation for disclosure. 93% cited child's right to know, 88% the desire for openness and honesty, and 79% the importance of genetic background for identity.
Among parents who didn't currently have donor identifying information, 59% were not aware of or unsure of where to access this information. 19% were not aware of when donor information could be accessed. 31% were not aware of or unsure of when the donor information could be accessed.
Many parents framed donor conception as "not a secret, but as private," disclosing to others selectively or deferring to their children's wishes.
Contact with donors varied but was generally positive, with donors often positioned as extended family members.
Limitations: Results may not represent all parents since those open about donor conception may be more likely to participate in research. Significant underrepresentation of Asian families in the study sample compared to the general population. Study limited to clinic-based conceptions, excluding significant out-of-clinic donor conception practices. Current contact information was not available for all eligible parents. Data collection limited to parents only.
Applications: Families might benefit from periodic check-ins at key developmental milestones (e.g., ages 5, 10, 15) to offer support when families actually need it, not just during fertility treatment. Families might benefit from annual updates on legal rights and procedures to all donor conception. Families might benefit from evidence-based interventions specifically designed for donor-conceived children struggling with identity issues, stigma, or family relationship concerns.
Funding Source: Not specified in conference abstract.
Lead Author: Karyn Anderson is a researcher at the University of Auckland's Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. Personal connection to donor conception not specified in available information.
Regulatory Context
New Zealand operates under the Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Act (2004), which specifies procedures for reproductive assistance and promotes an ethic of openness regarding donor information.
Open-identity (identity-release) donors' details are recorded on the HART register and made available to donor-conceived offspring at age 18 or earlier upon application by parents.
The law prohibits commercialization of gamete donation and surrogacy arrangements, though altruistic procurement is permitted.
Access to publicly funded fertility treatment is based on Clinical Priority Assessment Criteria (CPAC), which requires a medical diagnosis of infertility.
Related Posts
I'm pretty open about being donor conceived, and I haven't had anyone stigmatize me, at least not since I was a very small child (I remember the neighbour's dad telling me I shouldn't tell anyone about this but that was in the 1980s). I guess the stigma is more on the recipient parent's side?
It's really good to see the high rate of disclosure in New Zealand. The doctor involved in my conception told my parents not to disclose to me. My parents went against his advice after hearing a program about the importance of early disclosure to adoptees, and based the experiences of my dad's adopted siblings.
Not all my donor siblings were so lucky, so when they do a commercial DNA test and match with us it can be pretty traumatic.
I’m not surprised at the lack of Asians participating. I feel that I’m one of the few who are super open about it (I’ll have a post on it later this week) and was told that it would only confuse my son, especially if we meet a donor sibling.