TV Review: Scams and Scandals – Sunshine and secrets, the hidden side of IVF

Sperm and eggs from the wrong donors were used in IVF treatment for British families at clinics in Northern Cyprus, according to allegations explored in this BBC Scams and Scandals investigation.

In this episode, 'Sunshine and Secrets: The Hidden Side of IVF', investigative journalist Anna Collinson examines clinics in Northern Cyprus accused of using the wrong donor eggs or sperm, and attempts to help families get the answers they deserve (see BioNews 1334).

The episode mainly centres around parents Beth and Laura and their two children, who were both conceived using IVF at a clinic in Northern Cyprus. Beth and Laura each carried one child, years apart, but requested that the clinic use the same sperm donor so that their children would be biological half-siblings. The programme explains the IVF process in a very clear and accessible way, meaning that the audience does not need prior knowledge of IVF to understand what is happening or where the clinics went wrong.

After their second child, James, was born, Beth and Laura began to have concerns that the wrong sperm donor had been used, as James did not look how they expected. However, they did not initially explore these concerns, due to the emotional difficulty of doing so. When James was ten years old, they decided to have him and their first-born child, Kate, take commercial DNA tests. The profile of the sperm donor they requested stated that he was Danish, but the DNA results showed that neither James nor Kate had any Danish ancestry on their paternal side, and they did not appear to be related.

What I found particularly effective about the programme was the way Collinson spoke to James and Kate about this discovery, exploring how the revelation affected them. This highlighted how donor-conceived children may respond very differently to the same information. For Kate, the result made no difference to how she viewed her identity or her donor. James, however, found it more difficult, stating that 'identity, it is the main thing. It is who you are as a person.' I found this an interesting contrast, as it showed that even with the same upbringing and parents, children can place very different importance on knowing their genetic origins, highlighting how personal these experiences are for donor-conceived people.

The programme not only focuses on the emotional impact of the wrongdoing, but also explores wider systemic issues, such as the risks involved in travelling abroad for fertility treatment. It explained the trade-off between more affordable (and therefore more accessible) treatment and lower levels of regulation, and why cost often drives people to clinics in less regulated settings. Northern Cyprus, unlike the UK, does not have an independent fertility regulator. Dr Ippokratis Sarris of the British Fertility Society explains that UK regulation provides checks and balances. This lack of comparable safeguards abroad highlights ongoing concerns about access to safe and regulated fertility treatment.

One aspect that surprised me was that when parents described receiving eggs or sperm from the wrong donors, they often also felt the need to emphasise that they were still grateful for their children. They were not able to simply express anger and disappointment at the clinics that had caused this distress. As one mother, Kathryn, who received both the wrong egg and sperm, stated: 'I would never have agreed to the treatment had I known that I wasn’t going to get the donor that I selected.' This highlights that while these patients did not consent to the treatment they received, they still felt compelled to reaffirm that they loved and were grateful for their children when discussing such a breach. This ultimately shows that family is what you make it, but also suggests that there may be social pressure preventing parents from fully expressing their anger in these situations. It is clear that they loved their children, yet they still felt the need to explicitly restate their gratitude when discussing what had happened.

Overall, I thought the programme was highly accessible to viewers with no prior knowledge of IVF, whether of the treatments themselves or how they are regulated. I was also impressed by how much it covered in a relatively short time, from the emotional experiences of donor-conceived children to broader concerns about the lack of regulation faced by those travelling abroad for fertility treatment.