Film Review: Spermworld

As Spermworld opens, you a hear a low rumble that sounds like a car, or perhaps an ultrasound of a baby's heart, or hope. Yet what follows feels distinctly cold. A woman that viewers haven't been introduced to yet, drives to a hotel and walks into a room. A man joins her and begins walking her through the process of how he is going to proceed with the 'natural insemination' she has met up with him for, without skipping a beat. Understandably, she tells the man that she needs a minute, and so do I.

Spermworld, directed by Lance Oppenheim, takes viewers through the experiences of three donors,Tyree Kelly, Ari Nagel, and Steve Walker, one intended parent, Rachel Stanley, and one donor's fiancée, Atasha Peña Clay, as they navigate the world of online sperm donation using the Facebook group Sperm Donation USA. Individual posts from the group flash up on the screen and outline that intended parents in the group have chosen to look for donors online due to the cost and anonymity of sperm banks. The posts represent each stage of the process, from intended parents naively asking what natural insemination is and how it differs from artificial insemination, to 'bump checks' showing the stages various persons are at in their pregnancies.

The donors, overall, say they have chosen to donate either to help others or to find a purpose – or both. Tyree Kelly also donates blood and plasma, and appears to have chosen to become a donor to help others receive something necessary to live their lives as they want to. Steve Walker, a 65-year old recent divorcee, mentions how giving back is an important part of his life as he gets older, and thus donation seems bring this new focus to his life. Ari Nagel, a mathematics lecturer, appears to be donating to find a purpose in life, so much so that donation has become his life: He no longer has a permanent home, but roams house-to-house and apartment-to-apartment of the parents of his 138 (and counting) biological children.

Rachel Stanley, the main intended parent featured in the film, is twenty-eight years old. She has cystic fibrosis, a genetic condition that can limit life expectancy, and so wants to have a child sooner than later. Because of the cystic fibrosis and related health complications, medical professionals have recommended against her getting pregnant, saying that she could die if she makes the choice to do so. I very much empathise with Rachel in this regard, as I, too, at one point in my infertility journey received a recommendation not to get pregnant myself because of health risks. By selecting her as the recipient in the film, Oppenheim has chosen to put on display that trying to become pregnant is Rachel's choice to make. I very much respect him as a director for that decision, for it is important for the audience to see someone grapple with that choice and ultimately to pursue what they want in life.

The stories within Spermworld elicit a variety of emotions: While, perhaps, empathy or sympathy may be felt, I worry that too many cringe-worthy moments undermine the content and relationships at hand. This is especially true when viewers hear donors explain some of their reasoning for choosing to donate sperm. One compares donation to making a cake, another to helping short people reach the top shelf in the grocery store.

I can say firsthand, as a short person who has undergone her own infertility journey, that creating a child with a missing component is not just finding the ingredients to bake a cake on the top shelf, and even if it were, I would choose to climb up the bottom shelves to reach what I need (rather than having someone I don't know creepily follow me around to help). Because of the selection of the donors in the film, the documentary undermines viewers' opportunity to understand the proactivity of intended parents who use online sperm donation groups.

Somewhat similarly affecting in the film is the portrayal of Steve's relationship with Rachel. The two are eventually shown enjoying a blossoming friendship, but some moments in their relationship made me cringe at the screen: When Steve first provides logistics of the donation process, he tells Rachel that orgasm is recommended after insemination, and though he says that he obviously doesn't participate in this process, he does mention that would be available to assist if asked. He also comments inappropriately on her bisexuality.

What, perhaps, most negatively impacts the portrayal of relationships – and subject matter – in the film is the inclusion of Ari Nagel. He has 138 children at the time of filming, despite increasing moves by various jurisdictions to limit the number of families a donor can participate in building (see BioNews 1240). Even at his birthday party with many of his children celebrating in the next room, Ari discusses further donations with at least two women.

The filmography within Spermworld is stellar and full of emotion. Moments such as when Ari Nagel misses Passover, despite his Jewish mother having what seems to be later stage cancer, to visit two children in Hungary and to make a donation in Israel are impeccable, as is the apparent foreshadowing of Rachel's window of hope closing. I won't spoil it for you, but the cuts from one scene to the next are smooth and impactful, and the imagery is brilliant.

Spermworld is worth watching because it portrays an important subject with which many viewers may not be familiar – and it is widely available on popular platforms such as Hulu and Disney+. What concerns me is that it may give viewers the wrong impression of the process in general and fail to convey the desire of many intended parents to have a family, which is what the documentary's true focus ought to be.