Queensland ombudsman finds risk of errors in 4 in 10 audited sperm samples

Thousands of donor sperm samples in Queensland, Australia may be destroyed after an audit concluded that four in ten were at risk of misidentification.

The Queensland Office of Health Ombudsman's audit into the state's 24 licenced fertility providers was ordered by Queensland health minister Shannon Fentiman following a lawsuit brought by Anastasia and Lexie Gunn, against Queensland Fertility Group for providing the wrong sperm to conceive two of their children (see BioNews 1245).

In their published report, the Ombudsman revealed 42 percent of all audited samples were of medium or high risk of being misidentified. 'The investigation identified systemic issues relating to the provision of ART [assisted reproductive technology] services, including gaps and risks in the self-regulatory regime in Queensland', they wrote.

Queensland performs over 20 percent of all fertility treatments in Australia and has one of the country's biggest fertility industries. Most of the samples found to be at high risk of mislabelling were frozen before 2020; since then, a practice of 'double witnessing' clinical and laboratory procedures has reduced errors significantly.

The Reproductive Technology Accreditation Committee (RTAC) of the Fertility Society of Australia and New Zealand – the body responsible for licensing fertility clinics – already states that 'all stored donor material not meeting current identification standards be disposed of'. The Ombudsman itself has no power to order the destruction of sperm but recommends that RTAC enforce this rule, and make compliance with it 'a requirement of the audit process' for fertility clinics.

Further recommendations in the report included improvements in record keeping and the provision of information, including the creation of schedules of contact with donors for updated contact details and medical information, as well as the introduction of policies and procedures where 'a significant medical event is evident in a donor-conceived individual or a gamete donor and is disclosed to an ART provider'.

The Ombudsman report added that 'appropriate counselling should be offered by ART providers … to manage the emotional turmoil created with uncertainty about paternity and genetic origins'.

'We are probably just one family of many that this has happened to,' Anastasia Gunn told the Guardian. 'Why were the clinics not double-checking when they were making humans? The effects of these errors last for generations.'

Fentiman welcomed the findings and recommendations, adding: 'It is paramount that we protect the interests of consumers and donor-conceived individuals'.