ArticlePDF Available

Building a Family Tree: Donor-Conceived People, DNA Tracing and Donor 'Anonymity'.

Authors:

Abstract

Genealogical tracing of ancestors has existed across cultures and throughout history for thousands of years. Today it is a popular pastime for many, with motivations ranging from a desire to place themselves and their family within a larger historical picture, to preserving the past for future generations, to having a sense of self-satisfaction in accurate storytelling. It may also serve to assist people in framing their identify and building a picture of themselves. It may create a sense of connectedness and kinship. This is so for donor-conceived people, as it is with many others that search for information about their family history and heritage. This paper considers the obstacles to searching that donor-conceived people face. In particular, the secrecy that has surrounded donor conception has meant that many do not have access to the records that would identify their donor(s) or siblings. It examines the use of DNA testing, to assist. It is shown that, while proving a useful tool for some, such testing may not be enough for others. That donor-conceived people are denied access to records that would provide them with the information they seek is questioned. The authors therefore support laws that would provide access to records. Options of enabling contact vetoes or contact preferences are explored, as a way to ensure that people are comfortable that privacy and confidentiality will be protected.
A preview of the PDF is not available
... UKDL staff used the term 'linked' rather than 'matched' given that DNA testing could only provide probability of genetic linkage rather than certainty. Reliability of the results also varied according to (i) whether the DNA of the biological parent of the donor-conceived registrant was provided for the DNA database and (ii) whether testing was for 'donor to offspring' or for 'sibling' genetic relationships, with the latter being less reliable (see also Adams and Allan, 2013). Supplementary DNA testing to increase reliability was available but only if those concerned shared a gender ('x' chromosome testing for females, 'y' chromosome testing for males) and could afford the additional cost. ...
... This may be for a number of reasons. Although registrants were told that DNA testing is not 100% accurateespecially for identifying donor-related siblingsand that additional supporting non-DNA information is important (see also Adams and Allan, 2013) the drive (or hope) to find those to whom they are genetically related through donor conception may explain why around half of registrants in each category reported 'no problem' in being on the register when there was such lack of accuracy. In other words, acceptance of associated risk may be influenced by the individual meaning attached to finding such links. ...
Article
Full-text available
Medical science has enabled the creation of families through the use of donor conception but some lifelong policy and practice implications are only recently being recognized. Research and practice have shown that donor conception can, for some, carry substantial long-term consequences. In this paper we present findings from a questionnaire-based study that sought to shed light on donor-conceived adults’ and gamete donors’ views on service and support needs when searching for genetic relatives with the aid of DNA testing. The findings demonstrate the complexity and sensitivity of providing services in this newly emerging area of need. Such provision requires collaboration between very different disciplines and agencies (scientific and psychosocial), introduces the potential for blurring of lines of accountability and responsibility, and highlights the challenges of identifying appropriate funding streams. In addition, the findings demonstrate the opportunities and limitations afforded by the use of DNA in identifying unknown genetic relatives.
... Some donor-conceived people have made unexpected and/or unexplained matches or discovered the circumstances of their conception after using DTCGT. 59 This has ramifications both for donor-conceived people and for donors who were not expecting (and did not want) to be identified. 60 Genetic 'matches' can happen even if a donor has not used DTCGT themselves. ...
Article
The aim of Facial Kinship Verification (FKV) technologies is to determine, by comparing images of their faces, whether two people are related genetically. FKV is developing rapidly, and it could be used to search for genetic relatives in a variety of ways and settings, such as searching for missing children or unknown parents. In this article, we focus on one area where this technology might have significant implications, the searching for gamete (egg and sperm) and embryo donor(s) by donor-conceived people. In many jurisdictions, donor-conceived people do not have access to information about their donor’s identity, and laws differ significantly in this area. We offer an initial overview of the legal and related ethical issues raised by FKV in this context, and touch on other areas where it might be used to find genetic relatives, as a starting point for further analysis and research.
... Interestingly, the Swiss laws also allowed for retrospective release of information in 2004, but it is the more recent Victorian laws that have been reported in the news media to have influenced some practices in Japan (such as the abovementioned media report that one university hospital stopped accepting new patients due to fears of retrospective abolition of donor anonymity). 1 At the same time, the situation regarding donor anonymity is changing drastically due to the existence of direct-consumer DNA testing. 18,19 People can access their genealogies, and, in some cases, donor-conceived people can find their donor or donor siblings through DNA database searches. This means that regardless of laws or practices that support donor anonymity, donor-conceived people may gain direct access to the information they seek. ...
Article
Full-text available
An absence of any statutory law in Japan regarding donor conception creates uncertainty about the status of donors in relation to the child(ren) born as a result. Laws that provide for certainty regarding the status of the donor are called for, as are laws that address donor anonymity. It would be pragmatic to introduce a prospective system that requires open donation, allowing information to be recorded and released to donor‐conceived people upon request. For past donations, a voluntary register should be established, which would allow those people who are seeking information to register this.
... These include that they only provide level of probability of genetic links rather than certainty. Those unfamiliar with the science of DNA or otherwise unwilling to acknowledge its limitations (perhaps because of strength of desire to find 'donor relatives') may therefore have unrealistic expectations/beliefs about its robustness (Adams & Allan, 2013;Crawshaw, Gunter, Tidy, & Atherton, 2013;Crawshaw, Frith, van den Akker, & Blyth, 2016). ...
Article
Increasing numbers of donor-conceived individuals (and/or parents) are seeking individuals genetically related through donor conception. One route is through ‘direct-to-consumer’ (DTC) DNA testing, prompting calls for fertility services to alert donors and prospective parents to the increasing unsustainability of anonymity and secrecy. The complexity of interpreting DNA results in this context has also been discussed, including their lack of absolute certainty, as has the need for professional and peer support. This commentary highlights a different ‘threat’, from individuals learning of their donor-conception origins through the use of such tests by themselves or relatives for such purposes as genealogy or health checks. It illustrates the personal complexities faced by three older women and their families on learning not only of their genetic relationship to each other but also to 15 more donor-related siblings. DTC DNA services are a growing feature of modern life. This commentary raises ethical questions about their responsibilities towards those inadvertently learning of donor conception origins and the responsibilities of fertility services to inform prospective parents and donors of this new phenomenon. Considerations of how and when parents should tell their children of their donor-conception origins here instead become how and when children should inform their parents.
Article
Full-text available
This study articulates how naming and family trees can become epic texts upon which intended or unintended meanings, identities and narratives can be decoded, including mutations in families, as basic units of society. Many studies in African anthroponym have articulated names and naming from differing perspectives, but have tended to ignore the diachronic and synchronic significance of looking at family trees which are woven in time and space through naming. Within the framework of Darwinian Theory of Evolution, we used in-depth interviews with a purposive sample of respondents from the Bette people of the Obudu local government area, to enable us to build family trees which were subtextually analyzed for meaning and mutations through six generations. Our findings enabled us to develop deeper insights into how a longitudinal articulation of naming and family trees can enhance our understanding of the synchronic realities, increased cultural aliteracy, dislocation of homesteads due to occupational shifts, changing ideas of kinship, patriarchal attitudes towards women and challenge of new technologies like DNA testing and new media within the Bette traditional kinship tradition. Significantly, naming and family trees, beyond dynastic delineations for identity, inclusivity and otherness, can become signifiers of a people’s epic progression and mutation, and, as it were, a tapestry of significant narratives of micro and macro family history.
Article
Full-text available
The purpose of this paper is to present proposals for implementation of identifiable donation of gametes and embryos into the Polish law. The analysis is divided into three parts. The first part examines arguments for the abolition of a donor’s anonymity and the practical consequences of using direct-to-consumer genetic testing to track an anonymous donor. The second part deals with international documents regarding the child’s right to know their genetic origins; attempts to standardize the model of gamete and embryo donation within the member states of the Council of Europe, analysis of national jurisdictions, and debate on the retrospective amendments of law. The third part moves to analysis of how the identifiable donation should be implemented into the Polish law, assuming that the law should be changed only prospectively. Therefore, differentiation of donors who decide on donation before changing the law and after amendment of law is taken into consideration. Moreover, the third part examines which potential changes to law may be taken into consideration, assuming that it is justified to indicate the circumstances of third-party reproduction in documents related to the Polish Registry of Births, Marriages and Deaths.
Chapter
How are siblings who were conceived using the same sperm or egg donor making connections in the absence of legal support? What is it like to discover you are part of a 50+ donor sibling group? How are donor conceived adults using new technologies to connect with genetic family and explore their identity? This edited collection considers the donor linking experiences of donor conceived adults and children, recipient parents, and donors in a global context. It includes contributions from legal academics, social workers, sociologists, psychologists, and policy makers who work in the assisted conception field. As a result, it will be of particular interest to scholars of reproductive law, sociology, and digital media and reproductive technologies. It will also engage those following the debate around donor linking and the use of do-it-yourself technologies, including direct-to-consumer genetic testing and social media.
Article
Medically assisted reproduction is of significant public and policy interest across Europe. Where use of donor gametes (eggs, sperm, or embryos) is required, some people may employ ‘donor-matching’, which seeks to establish phenotypic similarity between gamete donors and recipient(s). This article examines donor-matching focusing on methods used to match donors and recipients, reasons for its use, and laws and practices across several European jurisdictions. The discussion is informed by examination of relevant literature, regulatory instruments, and consultation with practitioners and experts, and aims to inform wider theoretical and policy debates. Differences in practice and issues that arise across jurisdictions are highlighted. That donor-matching has the potential to be used by people born as a result of third-party reproduction to identify their donor is also discussed. The authors conclude that the use of donor-matching raises complex issues for recipients and donor-conceived people alike, which must be considered when contemplating its use and regulation.
Article
Anonymity is a multifaceted term. Anonymity is rarely eternal or absolute. The use of genetic databases increases the risk of identification of previously anonymous donors. Searches through genetic databases jeopardize the privacy of people who did and did not register on them. Three types of searches can be distinguished in the context of gamete donation: offspring looking for their donor, offspring looking for donor siblings and donors looking for their donor offspring. All three types of searches violate the rights of recipients and donors. It is argued that despite the existence of genetic databases, anonymity maintains the same function as it had before: it expresses a wish for distance and privacy by both donors and recipients and, even if not enforceable, should be respected by all parties in good faith.
Article
Full-text available
While assisted reproductive treatment using donated gametes is widespread, and in many places, widely accepted, it has historically been shrouded in secrecy. Over time, however, there has been an increasing call from donor-conceived people, recipient parents and some donors to end the secrecy, and to release identifying information about donors to donor-conceived people. "Rights-based" arguments have at times been used to justify this call. This article examines whether a human rights framework supports the release of information and how such a framework might be applied when there are competing rights. It argues that the current balancing approach used to resolve such issues weighs in favour of release. Legal action has the potential to be legitimate and justifiable. A measure such as a contact veto system, which would serve to prevent unwanted contact with the person lodging the veto (either the donor or the donor-conceived person), would ensure proportionality. In this way, both donor-conceived people's rights to private life, identity and family, and donors' rights to privacy may be recognised and balanced.
Article
Full-text available
Donor conception has historically been shrouded in secrecy. Such secrecy has been underpinned by social views and legal issues concemrning the adults involved in the process--the donor, the recipient parent(s), and, at times, the doctor. However, there is increasing recognition of the need to focus upon donor-conceived people's interests and rights to have identifying and non-identifying information about their donors. This editorial examines issues raised in relation to information release, while also introducing some of the arguments presented by other authors in this Special Issue of the JLM. It also considers recent Australian federal and State government inquiries that have favoured information release and the former Victorian Infertility Treatment Authority's service model to support people in the process of information access and release. While there has been a clear shift to favouring openness and honesty, legislative action is still required to ensure the balancing and realisation of people's interests.
Article
Full-text available
In the February 2011 report on its inquiry into the past and present practices of donor conception in Australia, the Australian Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee called for the introduction of legislation to regulate donor conception in all jurisdictions that do not have it in place "as a matter of priority". It further called for the establishment, "as a matter of priority", of a national register of donors to enable donor-conceived individuals to access identifying information about their donor. The Senate Committee left open the question as to whether the legislation and central register should have retrospective effect. This article focuses upon that question. It shows that arguments concerning the privacy, confidentiality and anonymity of some donors who may wish to remain anonymous are outweighed by the manifest injustice faced by donor-conceived individuals who are denied access to such information, as well as their families and donors who wish to exchange this information,
Article
Full-text available
Author Summary In this report we describe a framework for accurately and robustly resolving whether individuals are in a complex genomic DNA mixture using high-density single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotyping microarrays. We develop a theoretical framework for detecting an individual's presence within a mixture, show its limits through simulation, and finally demonstrate experimentally the identification of the presence of genomic DNA of individuals within a series of highly complex genomic mixtures. Our approaches demonstrate straightforward identification of trace amounts (<1%) of DNA from an individual contributor within a complex mixture. We show how probe-intensity analysis of high-density SNP data can be used, even given the experimental noise of a microarray. We discuss the implications of these findings in two fields: forensics and genome-wide association (GWA) genetic studies. Within forensics, resolving whether an individual is contributing trace amounts of genomic DNA to a complex mixture is a tremendous challenge. Within GWA studies, there is a considerable push to make experimental data publicly available so that the data can be combined with other studies. Our findings show that such an approach does not completely conceal identity, since it is straightforward to assess the probability that a person or relative participated in a GWA study.
Article
Anonymity Compromised The balance between maintaining individual privacy and sharing genomic information for research purposes has been a topic of considerable controversy. Gymrek et al. (p. 321 ; see the Policy Forum by Rodriguez et al. ) demonstrate that the anonymity of participants (and their families) can be compromised by analyzing Y-chromosome sequences from public genetic genealogy Web sites that contain (sometimes distant) relatives with the same surname. Short tandem repeats (STRs) on the Y chromosome of a target individual (whose sequence was freely available and identified in GenBank) were compared with information in public genealogy Web sites to determine the shortest time to the most recent common ancestor and find the most likely surname, which, when combined with age and state of residency identified the individual. When STRs from 911 individuals were used as the starting points, the analysis projected a success rate of 12% within the U.S. male population with Caucasian ancestry. Further analysis of detailed pedigrees from one collection revealed that families of individuals whose genomes are in public repositories could be identified with high probability.
Article
This article addresses arguments regarding disclosure of information to donor-conceived individuals, showing that disclosure is entirely different from the recognition of parental rights and responsibilities for the gamete providers. It argues that disclosure of information is not equivalent to saying: "donors are parents". Instead, information release simply provides a basis for donors, donor-conceived individuals and recipient parents to exchange information about themselves. When a jurisdiction enacts laws that provide for such information release, these statutes are distinct from any other legal rights and responsibilities for any members of the donor-conceived community. In its first section, the article briefly explains the means for determining legal parentage before reviewing research on how parents tell their children about their means of conception. Next, it explores studies of why members of the donor-conceived world search, providing an empirical basis for the claim that disclosure does not equal parenthood. The article explores concerns about information release, and, in the final section, suggests possible approaches for protecting the rights of donor-conceived people while reinforcing the legal separation between social and biological parents.
Article
This article reviews the Australian experience in providing information rights for people separated through adoption, and considers its relevance in adjusting the competing interests of those involved in donor conception. The Australian laws, which differ from State to State, create information rights for adults who have been adopted, and also--with more qualifications--for other family members, such as birth parents and siblings. Some laws also seek to protect privacy, notably by use of the "contact veto". The author argues that the review of the Australian laws provides strong support for the rights of donor offspring, when adult, to information about their genetic origins. It also raises important questions about the rights and interests of other family members involved in donor conception, and how they might be accommodated.
Article
This study investigates a new phenomenon whereby individuals conceived by donor insemination are searching for and contacting their donor and/or 'donor siblings' (i.e. donor offspring conceived by the same donor who are their genetic half siblings). On-line questionnaires were completed by members of the Donor Sibling Registry (DSR), a US-based registry that facilitates contact between donor conception families who share the same donor. Of the 165 donor offspring who completed the survey, 15% were searching for their donor siblings, 13% were searching for their donor, and 64% were searching for both. Differences were found according to family type and age of disclosure. Fewer offspring from heterosexual couple families had told their father about their search when compared with offspring from lesbian couple families who had told their co-parent. Offspring who had found out about their conception after age 18 were more likely to be searching for medical reasons, whereas those who had found out before age 18 tended to be searching out of curiosity. Some offspring had discovered large numbers of half siblings (maximum=13). The majority of offspring who had found their donor relations reported positive experiences and remained in regular contact with them.
Article
To provide an in-depth analysis of offspring attitudes toward their means of conception and the practice of sperm donation in the United States. Survey-based study using a 46-item questionnaire. Eighty-five adult offspring of sperm donation. Participants were recruited through an Internet-based support group for adults conceived through sperm donation. Eighty-five of them completed the questionnaire provided through a link to another Internet site. Responses to a 46-item questionnaire. A majority of offspring learned of their conception at age >18 years during a planned conversation; had no information about their donor; viewed their donor as their "biological father"; had searched for and wanted identifying information on their donor and half-siblings; and supported the provision of extensive nonidentifying information or identity release in the practice of sperm donation. Participant attitudes toward their means of conception were evenly distributed from "very good" to "very bad." Other descriptive information on participants contributed to an understanding of their attitudes. Participant ratings of their conception were evenly distributed from "very good" to "very bad." Most believed that identifying information should be provided to recipients and that they themselves would not participate in the practice of gamete donation.