Anonymity and secrecy options of recipient couples and donors, and ethnic origin influence in three types of oocyte donation

background: This study compares recipient couples’ and donors’ motivations towards the type of donation and attitudes concerning secrecy or disclosure of the mode of conception in three oocyte donation groups: couples and their donor for a known donation, couples and their donor for a permuted anonymous donation (known-anonymous) and couples without a donor, on a waiting list for a donation (anonymous). methods: Data collected by two psychologists through semi-structured interviews of 135 recipient couples and 90 donors before oocyte donation were analysed retrospectively. results: In known donation (42 couples), donors were preferentially family members with a blood tie (54.7%). Choosing their donor seemed mainly for the couple’s reassurance rather than to access the child’s origins as 50% wanted secrecy. On the other hand, in knownanonymous donation (48 couples), donors were more frequently chosen among friends (41.6%; P ¼ 0.038). These couples were either open to disclosure (45.8%; P ¼ 0.002) or remained hesitant (39.6%). In anonymous donation (45 couples), 49% chose not to seek a donor mostly in order to maintain secrecy towards the child (77.3%). Among the 51% who sought but could not find a donor, only 30.4% wanted secrecy. Recipients from North Africa and from Europe preferred anonymous or known-anonymous donation (83.3 and 75.6%), whereas subSaharan Africans opted more often for known donation (63%; P , 0.001). Among Europeans (90 couples), 50% were in favour of disclosure compared with only 8.9% of recipients from North or sub-Saharan Africa (45 couples; P , 0.001). conclusions: A diversity of attitudes and cultural differences exist among recipient couples and donors regarding oocyte donation; this pleads for maintaining access to different types of oocyte donation as well as for psychological counselling prior to treatment.