WHAT A 2021 SURVEY FOUND
• Burke, Lavery, Katznelson, North & Boyd surveyed 143 donor-conceived respondents; about 94% were conceived through anonymous donation.
• 73.8% often or very often thought about the nature of their conception.
• 48.5% sought psychological or psychiatric support after learning they were donor-conceived.
• 63.6% of those who did not know their donor’s identity wanted to know more about that parent’s identity.
• Researchers’ conclusion: The findings point to distress for some respondents and a need for counseling, donor medical information, early disclosure, and discouraging

WHAT A 2024 STUDY FOUND
• Zadeh, Jones & Jadva surveyed 88 donor-conceived adults in the UK about searching for donor connections.
• 44% were actively searching; 50% were open to contact but not actively searching; 6% were not searching.
• 67% (59 of 88) had found or been found by a donor connection.
• Searching and finding connections could be complex; genetic testing and social media were common search tools.
• Researchers’ conclusion: Support should recognize different preferences and experiences, including those who search, remain open to contact, or do not wish to

THE BROADER EVIDENCE — 2024 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

Talbot and colleagues reviewed 50 studies involving 4,666 donor-conceived people. Findings were mixed: most comparative studies found similar or better psychological well-being and relationships, while others identified mental-health and identity difficulties. Qualitative studies highlighted recurring concerns about biological origins, identity, genetic heritage, and mistrust. Evidence on long-term adult outcomes remains limited.

A CHILD’S INTEREST IN BIOLOGICAL ORIGINS DESERVES TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY.
Important context: These percentages describe study participants, not all donor-conceived people. Both adult-focused studies used small, non-random samples. The 2021 survey was self-selected and predominantly involved people conceived through anonymous sperm donation. The 2024 UK sample was largely recruited through donor-conception community networks and was 90% sperm-donor conceived.

Sources:
1. Burke R, Lavery YO, Katznelson G, North J, Boyd JW. “How Do Individuals Who Were Conceived Through the Use of Donor Technologies Feel About the Nature of their Conception?” Harvard Medical School Center for Bioethics, 2021.
2. Zadeh S, Jones C, Jadva V. “I have to remind myself that everyone’s search is different.” Human Reproduction. 2024;39(12):2722–2733. doi:10.1093/humrep/deae210.
3. Talbot C, Hodson N, Rose J, Bewley S. “Comparing the psychological outcomes of donor and non-donor conceived people: A systematic review.” BJOG. 2024;131(13):1747–1759. doi:10.1111/1471-0528.17892.

What Donor-Conceived Adults Tell Us About Identity and Origins

For decades, public conversations about donor conception have centered primarily on adults: their desire to have children, the availability of reproductive technology, and the choices offered by fertility clinics. Far less attention has been given to the people born through these arrangements—and to their questions about identity, biological relationships, and medical history.

Recent research offers important, though still limited, insight into the psychological, relational, and
identity-related experiences of donor-conceived individuals. A 2024 systematic review of 50 studies involving 4,666 donor-conceived people found a nuanced picture: most comparative studies suggested comparable or improved outcomes in well-being and relationships, while a notable minority identified mental-health or identity difficulties. Qualitative studies raised recurring themes of identity formation, mistrust, and concerns about genetic heritage. The authors emphasized that evidence about adult outcomes remains very limited.

Two other studies focused specifically on adult experiences offer additional insight. In a 2021 survey of 143 donor-conceived respondents, Burke and colleagues found that 84.6% reported a shift in their sense of self after learning the nature of their conception. Nearly three-quarters often or very often thought about being
donor-conceived, and 48.5% reported seeking psychological or psychiatric support after the discovery. The researchers called for greater attention to counseling, donor medical history, early disclosure, and discouraging anonymous donation.

A 2024 study by Zadeh, Jones, and Jadva surveyed 88 donor-conceived adults in the United Kingdom about searching for donor connections. Forty-four percent were actively searching, 50% were open to contact but not actively searching, and 6% were not searching. Sixty-seven percent had found or been found by a donor connection. The researchers emphasized that searching is not a uniform experience: motivations, expectations, and outcomes vary, and finding a connection can bring complex emotions. They recommended support that recognizes donor-conceived people’s differing preferences.

These findings require careful interpretation. Neither adult-focused study was a representative population survey. The 2021 sample was self-selected and largely conceived through anonymous sperm donation. The 2024 UK sample was mostly recruited through donor-conception community networks and was also predominantly
sperm-donor conceived. These studies cannot tell us what percentage of all donor-conceived people experience distress or want contact. They do, however, document experiences and interests that deserve serious consideration.

At the Center for Bioethics and Culture, we believe reproductive technologies must be evaluated not only by what they make possible for adults, but also by how they affect the human beings created through them. A child is not simply the fulfillment of an adult’s desire for parenthood. That child grows into an individual with questions, relationships, a genetic inheritance, and an interest in understanding their own story.

The desire to know one’s biological origins does not diminish the love of the parents who raised a person. Nor does it necessarily mean a donor-conceived person wants a parental relationship with a “donor”. It may mean wanting accurate medical information, knowing one’s ancestry, understanding genetic traits, or learning whether biological siblings exist. These are not trivial concerns, and they should not be dismissed because a person also has a loving family.

The evidence is still developing. That uncertainty should lead to, better long-term research and stronger safeguards—not to the assumption that donor-conceived people’s interests can be addressed later, if and when problems arise. Their interests should be considered from the beginning. The best interests, identity, and
long-term well-being of children must be part of the ethical and policy discussion surrounding third-party reproduction.

SELECTED RESEARCH
1. Burke R, Lavery YO, Katznelson G, North J, Boyd JW. “How Do Individuals Who Were Conceived Through the Use of Donor Technologies Feel About the Nature of their Conception?” Harvard Medical School Center for Bioethics, April 2021. Study link.
2. Zadeh S, Jones C, Jadva V. “I have to remind myself that everyone’s search is different.” Human Reproduction. 2024;39(12):2722–2733. doi:10.1093/humrep/deae210.
3. Talbot C, Hodson N, Rose J, Bewley S. “Comparing the psychological outcomes of donor and non-donor conceived people: A systematic review.” BJOG. 2024;131(13):1747–1759. doi:10.1111/1471-0528.17892.