Two-thirds of withdrawn sperm donor candidates believe sperm banks could not have prevented their decision to quit
Why donor candidates drop out or withdraw from the sperm donation process. (Pennings, 2025)
Pennings, G., Lemmen, J. G., Lassen, E., & Skytte, A. B. (2025). Why donor candidates drop out or withdraw from the sperm donation process. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 311, 114049. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2025.114049
Geographic Region: Denmark
Research Question: Why do donor candidates drop out or withdraw from the sperm donation process after initially expressing interest?
Design: Cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey conducted from December 2022 to January 2024. Researchers used a 15-statement online questionnaire covering reasons for withdrawal, social network reactions, and demographic information, with participants contacted approximately one month after their last interaction with the sperm bank.
Sample: 36 donor candidates. The researchers emailed 1,434 donor candidates who withdrew or dropped out of the sperm donation process at Cryos International over the two-year study period. 742 people opened the email invitation, and 36 completed the survey. The study response rate was 4%. The participants had a mean age of 25 years. Education levels were 36% secondary school, 56% bachelor's degree, and 6% master's degree or higher, while 64% had no partner and 83% had no children of their own. Regarding withdrawal stages, 56% had dropped out after the initial online application, 14% after completing the medical questionnaire, and 31% after receiving sperm quality test results.
Key Findings
56% of candidates realized during the process that the social, ethical, and personal consequences of donation were more complicated than anticipated.
42% already had doubts when they initially applied to donate.
39% lost motivation to continue and feared they might regret their decision later.
39% worried their current or future partner would not agree with their donation.
36% would feel responsible for the welfare of children born from their donation.
22% described their application as an impulsive decision.
44% thought the donation payment was too low.
42% disliked providing extensive personal information.
36% found producing a sperm sample in the clinic embarrassing.
69% clearly knew why they had stopped the process.
67% believed the sperm bank could not have done anything to keep them interested.
Limitations: The study's main limitation was the very low response rate (4.2%), which limits the representativeness of findings and may not capture the full range of withdrawal experiences. Additionally, the single sperm bank setting may limit generalizability to other contexts.
Applications: Banks, clinics, and matching programs can provide comprehensive pre-application counseling that addresses misconceptions about donation complexity, discusses partner involvement, and prepares candidates for the full scope of screening requirements and time commitments.
Funding Source: The study received no specific funding.
Lead Author: Guido Pennings is affiliated with the Bioethics Institute Ghent at Ghent University's Department of Philosophy and Moral Science and serves as a member of the Cryos External Scientific Advisory Committee. No personal connection to donor conception was disclosed.
Regulatory Context
Before 2007, only anonymous sperm donation was allowed. After 2007, both anonymous and non-anonymous sperm donation are permitted. Offspring can access non-anonymous donor’s identity at age 18.
Denmark is known for its large sperm banking industry.
Lesbian couples and single women gained access to fertility treatment in 2006.
No restrictions on donor compensation.
Denmark maintains detailed records to prevent consanguinity and requires donor registration for non-anonymous donations.
Related Posts