Parent-child bonds with co-parents could matter more than birth parent relationships for donor conception curiosity
Integration of donor conception into identity and parental attachment: adolescents in heterosexual-couple and lesbian-couple families. (Groundstroem, 2024)
Groundstroem, H., Paulin, J., Sydsjo, G., & Lampic, C. (2024). Integration of donor conception into identity and parental attachment: adolescents in heterosexual-couple and lesbian-couple families. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 49(4), 104758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2024.104758
Geographic Region: Sweden
Research Question: Is parental attachment related to the integration of donor conception into identity among adolescents in heterosexual-couple and lesbian-couple families following identity-release oocyte and sperm donation?
Design: A cross-sectional survey conducted in 2022-2023 as part of the Swedish Study on Gamete Donation (SSGD), a longitudinal study. Data were collected when the children reached adolescence (ages 13-17 years). The researchers used validated questionnaires, including the Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment to measure attachment security and the 16-item version of the Donor Conception Identity Questionnaire to assess curiosity and avoidance regarding donor conception. Multiple linear regression analyses were performed to examine relationships between variables while controlling for donation group, gender, and age.
Sample: 100 donor-conceived adolescents aged 13-17 years from two-parent families. The breakdown included 50 adolescents from lesbian-couple families using sperm donation (78% response rate), 27 from heterosexual-couple families using sperm donation (73% response rate), and 23 from heterosexual-couple families using oocyte donation (85% response rate). The gender distribution was nearly equal (48% girls, 52% boys). Most adolescents (82%) had been told about their donor conception before age 8. The majority of heterosexual-couple families still lived together, while less than half of lesbian-couple families remained together. All participating adolescents were from families where parents had disclosed the donor conception and informed children of their right to request donor information at age 18.
Key Findings
Overall, adolescents reported high levels of attachment security to both parents (mean scores around 100 out of 125 possible) and relatively low levels of curiosity and avoidant feelings about their donor conception (below the midpoint of 3 on both subscales). The family type (lesbian-couple vs. heterosexual-couple) and type of donation (sperm vs. oocyte) did not significantly influence the association between co-parent attachment and curiosity about donor origins.
Adolescents with more secure attachment to their father or co-mother (non-birth mother) showed less curiosity about their donor conception. This finding was statistically significant. However, statistical analysis found that the relationship between attachment to coparent and curiosity explained only a small portion of why some adolescents are more or less curious about their donor origins.
No relationship was found between attachment to the birth mother and curiosity about donor origins.
Limitations: The study relied on convenience sampling through participating parents, which may have excluded families with poorer parent-adolescent relationships or those who chose not to disclose donor conception. Risk of attrition bias as less well-functioning families may have dropped out of the longitudinal study over time. The study was conducted in Sweden's unique legal context where donor-conceived children have the right to obtain donor identity information, limiting generalizability to other contexts. The relationship between attachment and avoidance was too complicated to measure with their chosen statistical method, so they couldn't determine if there was a meaningful relationship there.
Applications: The finding that family relationship quality influences donor conception integration suggests that policies should include funding for ongoing family counseling and support services, not just pre-treatment counseling, to help maintain strong family bonds throughout child development. Early intervention programs should help non-genetic parents develop strong bonds with their children while educating all parents that children may express different levels of curiosity about their donor origins regardless of family relationship quality.
Editor’s Note: Previous research in single-mother and same-sex parent families found that securely attached children showed MORE curiosity about their donors - a healthy sign of feeling safe to explore their origins. Researchers recognized a gap: no one had studied how attachment works in two-parent heterosexual families. This study set out to fill that gap by examining whether the same positive relationship between secure attachment and donor curiosity would hold true.
The results suggest a different pattern: in this sample of two-parent families, secure attachment to the co-parent was associated with less curiosity about donor origins - though this was a small effect and represents a particular social-political context. This, my friends, is the beauty of research.
I want to emphasize that these findings should never be used to judge or pathologize curiosity about one’s origins or judge parenting. A teenager asking about their donor could be engaging in typical identity development, regardless of their attachment patterns. Similarly, lack of curiosity doesn't automatically indicate better or worse adjustment.
Funding Source: Not specified in the article.
Lead Author: Henrik Groundstroem is a licensed psychologist and PhD student at the Department of Psychology, Umeå University, Sweden. His current research explores the long-term psychosocial functioning of families with identity-release donor-conceived children. No personal connection to donor conception was indicated.
Regulatory Context
Sweden was one of the first countries to implement identity-release donation, passing legislation in 1984 that went into effect in 1985.
Only altruistic gamete donation is allowed. Donors can receive compensation for expenses and inconvenience, but not payment for the gametes themselves.
Both sperm and egg donation are permitted. Embryo donation became legal in 2019.
Same-sex female couples have had access to donor insemination since 2005 and IVF since 2016. Single women gained access in 2016.
Donation is only allowed at authorized fertility clinics. Private arrangements are not legal.
All prospective donors and recipients must undergo counseling and medical/psychological screening.
Donors must be 18 years or older.
Anonymous donation is prohibited. All donors must agree to be identifiable to offspring.
Donor-conceived individuals have the legal right to obtain identifying information about their donor when they reach "sufficient maturity," typically interpreted as age 18, though no specific age is mandated by law.
Parents are encouraged, but not legally required, to tell children about their donor conception. However, the information is recorded in medical records that the child can access as an adult.
There are restrictions on how many children/families can be created from one donor's gametes, but the exact number can vary between clinics.
A central register of all donor treatments is maintained by the National Board of Health and Welfare.
Donors do not have any legal or financial obligations to offspring. They are not considered the legal parents.
Related Posts
Good editor's note! Thank you for sharing this. I am a recipient parent via egg donation. My father is deeply interested in genealogy, so as a child I had many family vacations to small cemeteries and courthouses to search for records and information. My husband has absolutely no interest in that type of family history. I am so curious to see where my son will land!