A deep dive into digital platforms powering DIY sperm donation

Online, unregulated sperm donation has been hitting the headlines in recent years, but a question mark remains over the platforms powering the practice. How many are there, who runs them, and how do they work? These are some of the questions that we sought to answer in a recent study.

Growing numbers of people are turning to websites, social media groups and smartphone apps to look for sperm donors who might help them start or grow their families. This practice, which we refer to as online sperm donation (OSD), allows people to self-arrange donor conception outside fertility clinics.

OSD has sparked a surge in media coverage, with articles and television programs frequently portraying it as inherently risky, problematic, and unsafe. At the same time, OSD has received increased attention from academics and those working in the fertility sector, who often cite the health, legal, safety and interpersonal implications associated with this route to parenthood (see BioNews 1297, 1293).

However, academic attention and fertility activism have also been directed towards the social and economic realities that many people face when looking to start or grow their families, including the so-called 'tax' on LGBTQ+ people seeking to access state-funded donor insemination treatment in England.

What's more, those opting for OSD report several benefits of this route, which include getting to meet and really know their donor, avoiding a highly medicalised and time-consuming fertility treatment process, having a greater choice of (particularly ethnic minority) donors, and facilitating platonic co-parenting/alternative family arrangements. Consequently, those researching the practice have criticised the 'just say no' approach which has been adopted by some clinics and regulators (see BioNews 1244).

While some academic attention has been given to the motivations and experiences of those engaged in OSD, we still know very little about the platforms that are used to facilitate it. How many are there? How do they work? Who runs them? How do they safeguard users? And what can they tell us about how OSD works – or doesn't work – in practice? These are some of the questions that our study sought to answer.

Our study offers the first comprehensive scan of English-speaking OSD platforms, revealing a large digital ecosystem. Attempting to replicate the process that a potential donor or recipient might go through, we searched Google and Facebook for platforms that facilitate OSD. Below, we report some of the findings from our study...

What is the scope of OSD platforms?

We identified 52 English-language platforms, including nine websites, one app, and 43 Facebook groups with 343,422 total users between them. This far exceeds the 5,500 UK clinic-based donor insemination cycles in 2023, suggesting that OSD is indeed a burgeoning area of interest.

The oldest website was created in 2007, and the oldest Facebook group in 2013, with more being created year on year. The platforms were based in the UK, USA, Australia, France and the Philippines, but users were from all over the world.

Who are OSD platforms aimed at?

All of the platforms were aimed at people looking to receive and donate sperm to have a baby. Some platforms were targeted at the LGBTQ+ community, some at those looking to co-parent, and two alluded to the possibility that some users may also be looking for a romantic partner. Some platforms were targeted towards people of specific ethnicities or living in specific locations.

Seven platforms stated that only artificial insemination was allowed, and three Facebook groups stated that they were only for those looking to conceive via sexual insemination – natural insemination (NI) or partial insemination (PI).

How do OSD platforms work?

Most of the websites and the app resembled dating websites/apps. Two platforms used a 'matching' function (like Tinder), which only shows profiles of users who align with your specifications.

Most websites employed a subscription model, where it was free to join the site, but you had to pay to access some, or all, of the features. Only two included 'forum-style' spaces for discussion.

By contrast, all of the Facebook groups were free to use and included space for public discussion, questions and advice-sharing.

Who runs the platforms?

One website was run by two cisgender women, who had been recipients of sperm from a known donor. It was unclear who ran the other eight websites/app.

Sixty percent of the Facebook groups were had at least one sperm donor as a moderator.

What rules, codes of conduct, safety features and support are in place?

The app and most websites had their own code of conduct or guidelines which users were expected to abide by. Most Facebook groups did not have any rules or guidelines.

Approximately half the websites and the app had a 'report' function/button or a process for users to report any negative experiences or instances where the law might be broken, such as a donor requesting payment beyond reasonable expenses. Facebook has a built-in 'report' function, which some platforms encouraged use of.

Some platforms highlighted risks involved with online sperm donation, such as the potential for abuse, sexual coercion, 'catfishing' and the importance of obtaining sexually transmitted infection and genetic tests from the donor prior to insemination. One website offered an identity verification service.

Most websites and the app provided information on the law relating to legal parenthood in unregulated or co-parenting situations.

There was some good practice on the platforms, such as 'report' buttons and codes of conduct which outline how users should interact with each other. However, many of the platforms lack safeguards, such as clear reporting procedures and identity verification services, potentially exposing users to harm. Further, the responsibility to avoid harm is often placed solely on users.

However, given that many OSD platforms are run by community members with limited time, finances, and resources, we need to consider how to support capacity-building to enable improvements to the platforms.

Overall, OSD platforms appear to fulfil an essential function, especially for those who see them as one of the few viable options for achieving parenthood. Rather than calling for them to be shut down, we emphasise and advocate for the importance of improving their safety and sustainability.

Our findings also highlight the need for further research to explore global (non-English-speaking) OSD practices and to develop strategies and resources that better support and protect users navigating this complex and growing reproductive landscape.