Search

In this study, we focus on the donor origin of youngster who are raised in lesbian donor insemination (DI) families. The aim was to explore why some of these DI children like to know more about the donor while others do not, these data were gathered by means of a semi-structured interview. Secondly, we investigated, by means of several questionnaires, whether psychological variables such as global self-esteem, emotional and behavioral adjustment and children's perception of the quality of the parent-child relationship were in some way linked to whether or not they wanted to know more about the donor. In our study the majority of the children who preferred to have no information about the donor expressed their loyalty towards the social mother. For the majority of the children who opted for donor information, curiosity was the most salient motive. No differences were found with regard to the psychological variables between the two groups considered. In conclusion, the wish to know more about the donor or the absence of such a need is not reflected in the child's well-being and is not linked to the quality of the parent-child interaction.

This study presents the outcome of a 7-year psychotherapy of a girl who was born after donor insemination (DI) and who became ill with a compulsive disorder at the age of 8 years. Our demonstration supplements the present existing statistical data about families into which children have been born with the aid of DI. Aspects of child development, communication within the family, and family dynamics related to this specific constellation will be pointed out. This case study shows important aspects of the individual and the development of the family with regard to DI-constellations. Our paper emphasizes, in contrast to constellations of foster care or adoption, the impact on the parents' conscious knowledge and the child's unconscious knowledge of an absent--as well as less-known--family member (here: the invisible father) on the child's emotional development, health and competence of tying bonds. We also examine the relationship between the parents and their relationship with their DI child. Implications for individual therapy and therapeutic management of the family will be discussed, covering development of bonding and identity of the DI child, the father's role, dynamics of the couple, and the incognito of the 'invisible father'.

Pioneering legislation regarding donor insemination was introduced in Sweden in 1985. The law gives the child, upon reaching sufficient maturity, the right to obtain information about the donor and his identity. One hundred and forty-eight Swedish couples with children conceived through donor insemination after the law was introduced have answered questions about disclosure and donation in a questionnaire. This article addresses the reasoning employed by individual couples in their decision whether or not to inform the children about their origin. Parental reflections on their decision and the children's reactions to receiving this information are also presented. Five categories of parental arguments are reported. These included 'reasons to tell', 'reasons not to tell', 'reasons why the question about telling or not would not be answered at all', 'inconclusive types of reasoning, that can still influence the fundamental decision' and 'context-dependent reasons associated with actual circumstances'. Through this meta-classification of arguments it was possible to identify clues to how professionals could facilitate parental decision-making and promote disclosure. Parents who had informed their children did not regret their decision. All of the parents who responded to the question of whether it had been beneficial to the child to tell answered 'yes'.

Reports were based on 23 lesbian couples seeking therapeutic donor insemination (TDI). Seventeen single women and 14 heterosexual couples with known infertility, due to vasectomy, were recipient controls. No group differences were found on self-esteem, psychiatric symptomatology or dyadic adjustment, except that lesbians reported greater dyadic cohesion than heterosexuals. Lesbians and single women were likely to disclose their use of TDI to others and had planned to disclose this to any child conceived; married couples were divided on this issue. Groups were alike in what they wanted to know about the donor (principally health variables and medical history), and in their concerns about the use of TDI (genetic and medical history). Groups differed in the reasons they elected to use TDI, with lesbian couples and single women choosing TDI affirmatively, and married couples accepting it as a last resort.

Disclosing the use of donor insemination (DI) to family, friends, and offspring poses a quandary for many DI patients. A cross-sectional survey was conducted to determine whether couples opted to share information about conception via donor sperm with their children, as well as the issues and concerns that arose for parents once infertility treatment was completed. Twenty-seven married heterosexual infertile husbands and wives who had used DI to conceive completed a follow-up questionnaire asking them about disclosure decisions as well as thoughts about DI as a reproductive option. Results revealed that nearly three-quarters of the sample had not disclosed to their child and did not plan to, although 85% had told at least one other person about conception via DI. With few exceptions, husbands and wives agreed about how to handle disclosure. Notably, 32% of the mothers reported not knowing when or how to disclose. However, the majority of couples were not offered psychological counseling prior or subsequent to DI. It is suggested that mental health professionals should be aware of the divergence of opinion between what they believe about the benefits of disclosure/counseling, the beliefs of infertile couples about disclosure and what is actually known about the benefits of full disclosure among all involved parties.

It is suggested that infertility may be distressing because it results in an inability to fulfil traditional roles and thus those individuals who adhere to traditional sex roles may be more distressed by the experience of infertility. In order to examine the relationship between sex role and emotional well-being in infertility patients, 58 women attending a clinic for assisted conception procedures and 31 of their male partners completed questionnaires assessing sex-role type (i.e. masculine, feminine, androgynous or undifferentiated) and emotional, marital and sexual functioning. Women with a traditional feminine sex-role type were more anxious than those with a masculine sex-role type but there were no differences in depression or marital or sexual functioning. Men with an undifferentiated sex-role type were more anxious and depressed than those with other sex-role types. The findings are discussed in terms of the relationship between sex role and infertility, previous research into sex differences in distress amongst infertility patients, and the problems associated with measuring distress.