Anonymity and False Promises: Gamete Donation in the Modern Age

Aadya Gujja

Direct-to-consumer genetic testing has become increasingly popular in recent years, with over 100 million people having participated as of 2021, according to the American Medical Association.¹ This prompts a discussion of the plethora of potential privacy concerns that come with commercializing medical testing and an individual’s health records. It goes far past just the person signing the agreement to send in their DNA, as it can affect relatives, who share genetic information, by implicating them in a way in which they may not have agreed to. Specifically, this process becoming more readily available brings up troubling implications for anonymous sperm and egg donation. Commercial genetic testing, particularly regarding ancestry, is contradictory to the anonymity of gamete donors, and without proper regulation, the privacy of these individuals will be at serious risk. The FDA must step in and create standards that address this issue, otherwise the future of this type of fertilization could be at stake. Specifically, they must confidently state that donation from now on will no longer be anonymous and implement the Uniform Parentage Act on a national level in order to address the implications that donor anonymity isn’t a promise that can be kept.

Ancestry tests tend to be less regulated than other types of genetic tests that determine whether an individual is a carrier for a certain disease, or whether they’re more susceptible to a specific illness, such as cancer. The FDA lists the types of commercial genetic tests that they regulate, and they only examine ones that carry moderate to high risk medical information. Ancestry tests don’t fall under this domain, and therefore are not subject to regulations like privacy standards, which fall to the individual companies. In fact, the only law that specifically outlines genetic testing is the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, which states that a person can’t be discriminated against due to their genetic information. However, this act doesn’t directly address privacy concerns.² For example, it cannot prevent a child who was born through sperm or egg donation from ordering one of these tests and discovering who their birth mother/father is, regardless of the anonymity agreement that was signed when the gamete was first donated. This is a real concern that banks have to take into account, because this lack of privacy could decrease the amount of gametes donated. Sean Tipton, a spokesperson for the American Society of Reproductive Medicine says that “donors cannot be promised anonymity at this point,” and that “the banks can say, ‘We won’t disclose.’ But that doesn’t mean that people aren’t going to find [the donor].”³ Big sperm banks such as California Cryobank have responded to this change in modern technology by denying anonymous donations, which caused a reduction in donations. However, they believe that the culture surrounding gamete donation is changing, and soon this issue of anonymity will not be as big of a problem³.

Anonymity is an important part of gamete donation, and there are concerns regarding whether a ban on anonymous donations would decrease the total number, especially in a time where assisted reproductive technology is so prevalent. According to Dr. Tamer Said, the director of Ontario’s Andrology Laboratory & Reproductive Tissue Bank at The Toronto Institute for Reproductive Medicine, “countries that already banned anonymity have experienced a donor semen shortage that is even worse than Canada,” and “majority of the donors interviewed indicated that they will not commit into becoming semen donors if their identity is automatically disclosed.”⁴ However, this quote was reported in 2010, and as stated previously, the culture surrounding sperm donation has become more equipped to accommodate the change in supply associated with eliminating the option of donor anonymity. For example, France recently lifted its donor anonymity promise in 2022, which allows children that were born as a result of donated gametes to contact their donor when they turn 18. Although the expectation was that the donors would decrease as a result, the number of donors actually increased by 160 in 2022⁵. In the United States, from 2006 to 2024, the number of sperm donors has stayed relatively constant, but there has been a significant increase in the number of open identity donors. Specifically, there were 202 open identity donors from 31 different banks in 2006, compared to 1,146 from 14 banks in 2024⁶. Also, from 1996 to 2024, the number of sperm banks in the United States decreased from 29 to 15, but the number of sperm banks with open-identity programs tripled from 3 to 9.⁶

A number of states have started to react to this changing culture by enacting versions of the Uniform Parentage Act, which states that the donors are not legal parents of the child conceived with their gamete(s). This act establishes a basis to alleviate some of the legal concerns that come with donors wanting to pursue anonymity, such as child support⁷. The act has been enacted in California, Washington, Nevada, Colorado, Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island; meanwhile, other states are in the process of enacting different versions of this act⁷. Some states have taken these disclosures further. Washington, for example, mandates that sperm banks automatically give information to the child when they turn 18 unless the gamete donor explicitly refuses contact. California, Connecticut, and Rhode Island, have similar practices to Washington, but banks contact donors to inform them that children have attempted to reach out, regardless of donors’ consent⁷. Washington and California are key states in this industry, as they house two of the largest sperm banks in the United States: California Cryobank and Seattle Sperm Bank.

Currently, anonymity is no longer so simple as a bank claiming full privacy, largely due to the increase in popularity of individual, commercial genetic testing. The federal government should respond to this change in technology and culture by instituting a mandate against claiming that gamete donation is anonymous and implement the Uniform Parentage Act on a national level. The data suggests that this would not significantly interfere with the supply of sperm. Moreover, this mandate would enable long-term trust both between donors, banks, and donor-conceived children, as there will no longer be the fear of breaking a promise that neither side can completely control.

Works Cited

Henry T. Protect sensitive individual data at risk from DTC genetic tests [Internet]. American Medical Association. 2021. Available from: https://www.ama-assn.org/practice-management/hipaa/protect-sensitive-individual-data-risk-dtc-genetic-tests
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. Direct-to-Consumer Tests. FDA [Internet]. 2019 Dec 20; Available from: https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/in-vitro-diagnostics/direct-consumer-tests
Silver K. Sperm Donors May Not Be as Anonymous as They Think [Internet]. WebMD. 2024. Available from: https://www.webmd.com/infertility-and-reproduction/features/sperm-donors-contacted
Collier R. Disclosing the identity of sperm donors. Canadian Medical Association Journal. 2010 Jan 11;182(3):232–3. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.109-3144
Flynn H. France announces more sperm and egg banks to meet demand | PET [Internet]. PET. 2023 [cited 2025 Apr 9]. Available from: https://www.progress.org.uk/france-announces-more-sperm-and-egg-banks-to-meet-demand/
Valido A, Harbour V, Scheib JE. Increase in open-identity sperm donation in the United States since 1996. Fertility and Sterility. 2024 Sep. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2024.09.012
Mariwala T. Anonymous Egg Donation Laws in the US and Abroad [Internet]. www.cofertility.com. 2022. Available from: https://www.cofertility.com/family-learn/anonymous-egg-donation-laws-in-the-us-and-abroad