A European fertility group has called for limits on sperm donation, as increasing numbers of donor-conceived adults discover they have hundreds of siblings across the continent.

Key Takeaways:

• The European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) has called for a blanket donation limit across Europe, rather than limits set by each country.

• A position paper recommended beginning with a limit of 50 families per donor across Europe, and reducing it to 15 families over time.

• The unchecked fertility industry has allowed sperm donors to have hundreds, if not thousands, of children.

The Details:

This summer, the ESHRE released a position paper calling for stronger limits on sperm donation, and for them to be universally enacted across Europe. The group specifically pointed out how easily sperm donors are able to cross country lines and continue donating, even if they are banned in one country:

While most European countries impose national limits on the number of offspring or families that can be created using gametes from a single donor in their country, these limits are not always enforced, and there is no agreed international limit.

In Europe, the movement of patients and the export of donor gametes to other countries are common practices. For example, a study from 2014 found that 63% of inseminations with donor sperm in Belgium were carried out with donor sperm imported from Denmark.

In this context, the lack of an international limit on gamete use can lead to large groups of donor-conceived people from the same donor spread throughout multiple countries.

The group used the example of sperm donors who had fathered hundreds of children as the reason more regulation is needed. It was also pointed out that many donor-conceived adults find themselves in difficult situations when they learn they have multiple donor siblings, noting that some have felt mass-produced and commodified. Donors themselves may also be affected, particularly with the advent of online DNA testing:

For a donor, it might be difficult to respond to each contact request in a thoughtful way if there are a great number of offspring, let alone invest in an ongoing relationship with each of them if desired.

Just like with donor-conceived people, the discovery of a large number of donor offspring might feel overwhelming to donors. Donors might also be concerned about the impact of large offspring numbers on their own children. 

Additionally, the group pointed out there is a growing risk of accidental incest, particularly in cases where donor-conceived adults are not told by their parents that they were donor-conceived. Ultimately, ESHRE said the well-being of donor-conceived adults should be the highest priority.

The group's recommendation is to start with a 50-family limit per donor, and to phase it down to 15 families over time; these limits would be international, so donors could not simply travel to another country to donate once they had exceeded the limit in a different country.

Why It Matters:

Six European Union (EU) nations have already called for stricter limits on sperm donation.

Because of the unregulated fertility industry, donor-conceived children are increasingly treated as products that adults are owed, rather than as actual children with rights of their own.

Some donors are known to have fathered hundreds, if not thousands, of children, including donors who have cancer-causing gene variants, which are then passed down to their children. Sperm donation is also often anonymous, so donor-conceived children are often intentionally deprived of knowing their background, medical history, and heritage.

There are also no safety checks to ensure those buying children are safe. Would-be adoptive parents must pass background checks and other legal requirements, but the same is not true of people who become parents through the fertility industry.

For example, YouTuber Shane Dawson was able to become the parent of twins through egg donation and surrogacy, despite having a history of repeatedly sexualizing children, including infants.

In addition, the Baby Gammy controversy, in which an Australian couple abandoned one of the twins created and born through surrogacy in Thailand, garnered international headlines. However, the child that was not abandoned was taken home to Australia with her purchasers, one of whom was a registered sex offender, yet was still able to keep custody of the little girl.

There are countless more examples.

The Bottom Line:

For too long, the emphasis and priority of the fertility industry has been focused on would-be parents instead of the children being created, even as it is increasingly made clear that this mindset is detrimental to the children.

One Harvard Medical School study found that 62% of donor-conceived adults believe it to be unethical and immoral.

“I am a human being, yet I was conceived with a technique that had its origins in animal husbandry,” one donor-conceived person wrote in a book for Anonymous Us. “Worst of all, farmers kept better records of their cattle’s genealogy than assisted reproductive clinics … how could the doctors, sworn to ‘first do no harm’ create a system where I now face the pain and loss of my own identity and heritage?”