TV Review: Swipe Right for Sperm

In this episode of BBC Wales Investigates, reporter Gemma Dunstan examines why people are turning to social media to find unregulated sperm donors, meeting with the men travelling the world to donate sperm and exploring what happens when you order a sample online.

The episode begins with Dunstan talking with 'Donor Dan', a 'professional' sperm donor from Germany, and his trainee, Finn. They meet as Dan is in the UK during his world tour donating sperm. I found it interesting to get his perspective on why he had decided to become a donor. Conceived using donor sperm himself, he is now in touch with his biological father and many of his 22 half-siblings: 'If I didn't pass that on, that gift of half-siblings, on to my own children, I would… not set them up with the best opportunities I can,' he explains.

It was also enlightening to hear how Dan views the legal challenges he may face as an unregulated sperm donor, for instance regarding the financial support he may owe his offspring: 'If someone sends me a letter, invites me to court,' he says, 'I'm just never going to visit that country again.' I appreciated how this discussion highlighted the potential risks of being an unregulated donor, as the conversation often focuses on the recipients instead.

At the end of the episode, however, it became clear that Dan was not who he claimed to be. A few months after filming, Finn contacted Dunstan to explain that he had cut contact with Dan, having grown skeptical of his former mentor and believing he was 'profit maximising' instead of donating out of good intentions. Finn also shared WhatsApp conversations in which Dan explained he wanted to buy a ranch in the USA to create a 'fun cult', flying women in to get impregnated and even hoping to 'sneak in a couple of natural inseminations' with 'top chicks.'

This was particularly enlightening in the wake of Dunstan having met recipients of Dan's sperm, a UK couple who stated they had chosen him as donor after watching him be open with his lifestyle on social media and answering questions at length in a video. I think this perfectly encapsulated some of the dangers of using unregulated sperm donors, and how easily they can present a false narrative to prospective recipients. Dan disputes Finn's claims, however, stating the messages had been sent by a virtual assistant who has since been fired.

The programme also looked into 'next-day delivery' sperm donations. Dunstan ordered a sample from 'Joe Donor', whose real name is Robert Albon. His donations have resulted in around 180 live births, and he has been involved in many family court cases where judges have warned against his actions, saying he's a danger to women (see BioNews 1277). Dunstan's enquiry did not give rise to any questions about her from Joe, who only said he would send her sperm for £100 in cash. When the sample arrived, Dunstan took it to a fertility clinic for checking: no live sperm could be detected, with the embryologist reporting she believes it may be due to the sample having been packaged chilled. I thought this was an important part of the programme, as it highlighted how untrustworthy many of these unregulated sperm donors are. Crucially, the audience did not need to have any prior knowledge of how fertility treatments work to grasp this message.

Dunstan spoke to another couple who had used an unregulated sperm donor, helping viewers to better understand why people may opt for that option. The two women were not eligible for free treatment on the NHS, and felt the only way forward for them was to find a donor via an online group. They discussed the possibility that the donor could try to claim parental rights in the future, with the couple stating they felt they had put enough in place to protect themselves, and that they did not believe this is something the donor would do.

On this, I wish the programme could have gone into more detail as to how the sperm donor may be entitled to parental rights, and made that information clearer and more accessible. Dunstan did briefly interview Clare Ettinghausen from the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, to talk through the issues associated with unregulated donations, focusing mostly on the risk of sexually transmitted or genetic diseases. However, I felt the legal implications of using an unregulated sperm donor were not discussed enough, almost as if it was assumed viewers would be aware of them.

Overall, I found the programme highly entertaining and informative. I enjoyed its more person-centred approach, with Dunstan spending time with individual sperm donors and talking to couples who have used online groups for sperm donation. However, I think it fell slightly short when covering some of the dangers of using unregulated donors, in particular regarding the legal risks associated with the practice, such as donors being entitled to parental rights or having a duty to provide financial support.