目标:比利时的捐赠者受孕成年人是否有兴趣获得捐赠者信息,这些兴趣是否因家庭背景而异?
结论:捐赠者受孕的成年人对获取捐赠者相关信息表现出极大的兴趣,与来自女同性恋夫妇或单亲家庭的后代相比,异性恋夫妇的后代的兴趣最高。
背景:在比利时,精子捐赠主要是匿名的,但是直接面向消费者的基因检测的兴起对这种匿名性提出了挑战。
方法:这是一项横断面研究,涉及2022年7月至2023年10月进行的全国在线调查。参与者,18岁及以上,并意识到他们的匿名精子捐赠者受孕状态,通过各种渠道招募。
方法:共包括203名参与者:62.6%的人在父亲不育的异性恋家庭中长大,26.1%的女同性恋伴侣,8.4%的单亲父母,在不同或不同的家庭结构中占3.0%。这项调查有法语和荷兰语两种版本,包括43个问题,包括是/否问题和多项选择项目的混合。
结果:披露的平均年龄为16.5岁,尤其是后来在异性恋夫妇父母家庭中披露。大量82.8%的捐赠者受孕个人对获取非个人身份捐赠者信息表示了浓厚的兴趣,而69%的人对个人身份捐赠者数据感到好奇。此外,61.6%的人表示希望与捐赠者进行个人接触,26.6%的人主张在出生证明上加上捐献者的名字。与其他家庭结构中的参与者相比,在女同性恋双亲家庭中长大的参与者对捐助者相关信息的兴趣最低。压倒性的90.1%的人想知道是否有来自同一精子捐赠者的同父异母兄弟姐妹。对DNA数据库注册的调查响应分析显示,55.2%的供体受孕后代已经注册,68.8%的人发现了相同的捐赠者后代,30.4%的人成功找到了捐赠者。与来自其他家庭结构的个人相比,那些在异性恋夫妇父母家庭中长大的人通过匿名精子捐赠对他们的受孕表现出不那么积极的态度。大约61.6%的捐赠者受孕个体报告说,与同龄人相比,他们经历了不同的情绪。而44.1%的人遇到了与匿名精子捐赠有关的心理困难,主要归因于后期披露。大多数人支持向捐赠者通报他促成怀孕的孩子数量的想法。最后,该研究强调,有21.2%的捐赠者受孕的成年人考虑自己成为捐赠者,31.3%的人表示愿意在面临生育挑战时使用匿名捐赠者。
结论:我们的样本量可能无法完全代表比利时通过匿名精子捐赠受孕的所有成年人。参与偏见可能影响了结果,特别是由于异性伴侣的参与者人数过多。此外,异性恋夫妇抚养的个体与后期披露之间存在关联,通过引入混杂因素使分析复杂化。
结论:这项研究的结果有助于更好地了解供体受孕成年人的需求和偏好,对患者教育和医疗保健政策具有重大潜在影响。
背景:这项研究没有获得研究资金。没有利益冲突需要披露。
背景:不适用。
OBJECTIVE: Are
donor-conceived adults in Belgium interested in obtaining
donor information, and do these interests vary based on their family backgrounds?
CONCLUSIONS: Donor-conceived adults express a significant interest in obtaining
donor-related information, with the highest interest reported by offspring from heterosexual couples compared to those from lesbian couple-parented or single-parent families.
BACKGROUND: In Belgium, sperm donation is mainly anonymous, but the rise of direct-to-consumer genetic testing challenges this anonymity.
METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study involving an online nationwide survey conducted from July 2022 to October 2023. Participants, aged 18 years and older and being aware of their anonymous sperm
donor-conceived status, were recruited through various channels.
METHODS: A total of 203 participants were included: 62.6% grew up in heterosexual families with infertile fathers, 26.1% with lesbian couples, 8.4% with single parents, and 3.0% in various or diverse family structures. The survey was available in both French and Dutch and consisted of 43 questions, including a mix of yes/no questions and multiple-choice items.
RESULTS: The average age of disclosure was 16.5 years, with notably later disclosure in heterosexual couple-parented households. A substantial 82.8% of donor-conceived individuals expressed a keen interest in obtaining non-personally identifiable
donor information, while 69% were curious about personally identifiable
donor data. Furthermore, 61.6% conveyed a desire for personal contact with their donors, and 26.6% advocated for the inclusion of the donor\'s name on their birth certificates. Participants raised in lesbian two-parent families exhibited the lowest level of interest in donor-related information compared with those raised in other family structures. An overwhelming 90.1% wondered about the possibility of having half-siblings from the same sperm donor. Analysis of survey responses on DNA database registration revealed that 55.2% of donor-conceived offspring were already registered, with 68.8% discovering the same donor offspring and 30.4% successfully locating their donors. Compared to individuals from other family structures, those raised in heterosexual couple-parented households exhibit a less positive attitude toward their conception through anonymous sperm donation. About 61.6% of
donor-conceived individuals reported experiencing distinct emotions compared to their peers, while 44.1% encountered psychological difficulties related to anonymous sperm donation, primarily attributed to late disclosure. The majority supported the idea of informing the donor about the number of children he facilitated to conceive. Lastly, the study highlighted that 21.2% of donor-conceived adults considered becoming donors themselves, and 31.3% expressed willingness to use an anonymous donor whenever faced with fertility challenges.
CONCLUSIONS: Our sample size may not fully represent all adults conceived through anonymous sperm donation in Belgium. Participation bias may have influenced the results, especially due to the overrepresentation of participants from heterosexual couples. Additionally, an association exists between individuals raised by heterosexual couples and late disclosure, complicating the analysis by introducing a confounding factor.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study contribute to a better understanding of the needs and preferences of donor-conceived adults, with significant potential impact on patient education and healthcare policy.
BACKGROUND: Study funding was not obtained for this research. There are no conflicts of interest to disclose.
BACKGROUND: N/A.