Erratum to: Finding people like me: contact among young adults who share an open-identity sperm donor.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1093/hropen/hoaa057.].

Finding people like me: contact among young adults who share an open-identity sperm donor.

STUDY QUESTION: What interests and experiences do donor-conceived adults have with respect to same-donor peers/siblings, when they share an open-identity sperm donor? SUMMARY ANSWER: Donor-conceived young adults report considerable interest in, and primarily positive experiences with, their same-donor peers, with some finding 'people like me'. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Through mutual-consent contact registries, director-to-consumer DNA testing and other means, donor-conceived people with anonymous (i.e. closed-identity) sperm donors are gaining identity-related information from, and establishing relationships with, people who share their donor. STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION: Semi-structured, in depth telephone and Skype interviews with 47 donor-conceived young adults were carried out over a 31-month period. Inclusion criteria were being one of the first adults for each donor to obtain their identity and being at least 1-year post donor-information release. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS: Participants (aged 19-29 years, 68.1% women) were born to female same-sex couple parents (46.8%), a single mother (29.8%) or heterosexual couple parents (23.4%); all parents had conceived through the same US open-identity sperm donation program. The dataset was analyzed thematically and included interviews from only one participant per family. Each participant had a different donor. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Interest in, and experiences with, same-donor peers suggested that they occupy a unique position in the lives of donor-conceived young adults who share their open-identity donor. Contact can provide identity-relevant information and support through the availability of relationships (whether actualized or potential), shared experiences, and easier relationships than with their donor. Most donor-conceived young adults felt positively about their contact experiences. Of those not yet linked, almost all expressed an interest to do so. Some had met the children raised by their donor. When asked, all expressed an interest in doing so. LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: Interviews were conducted with donor-conceived young adults who were uncommon in their generation in terms of: having an open-identity sperm donor; the majority knowing about their family's origins from childhood; and having parents that accessed at the time one of the only open-identity sperm donation programs. Further research is needed to assess applicability to all donor-conceived adults; findings may be more relevant to the growing number of people who have an open-identity donor and learned in childhood about their family's origins. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Participants were among the first generation of donor-conceived adults with an open-identity sperm donor. Their experiences and perspectives can provide essential guidance to programs and others with similar origins. Early disclosure of family origins and identifying the donor did not diminish the young adults' interest in their same-donor peers. Positive experiences suggest that the benefits of contact include not only identity-relevant information (through shared traits and experiences), but also relationships with and support from people who understand the uncommon experience of being donor conceived. Implications include the need to educate families and intended parents about the potential benefits of knowing others who are donor conceived, and the risk of unexpected linking across families by donors, regardless of donor-conceived person or family interest. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The study was funded by the Lesbian Health Fund of GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBTQ Equality. The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

Female-partnered and single women's contact motivations and experiences with donor-linked families.

STUDY QUESTION: What are female-partnered and single mothers' motivations and experiences at one donor insemination (DI) program with regard to contacting other families who share the same sperm donor? SUMMARY ANSWER: By and large, women reported seeking contact to obtain (i) support for their children and/or themselves, and (ii) information about shared traits and medical problems, ultimately describing a range of contact experiences, both positive (e.g. special bond created) and negative (e.g. uncomfortable encounters). WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: There is a growing phenomenon of donor insemination families-parents and/or offspring-seeking others who share their donor (i.e. are 'donor-linked'). There is limited understanding about parental motivations and experiences-especially in the presence of a second parent-due to the methodological constraints of previous quantitative studies. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 50 donor insemination mothers (14 single, 36 female-partnered). Participants were recruited by email invitation to parent members of a family-matching service at one donor insemination program in the USA. The criterion for inclusion was having matched to at least one donor-linked family. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Among the 50 mothers interviewed, all had at least one child conceived via donor insemination, who was between ages 0 and 15 years at first contact. Families matched with a median of three donor-linked families (range 1-10). Interview data were analyzed through qualitative (i.e. thematic) analysis. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Overarching themes emerged of seeking contact to obtain (i) support and (ii) information about children's shared physical and psychological traits. Some wanted to increase their child's family network, through adding a sibling, but more often as extended family. Data, from partnered parents especially, revealed the challenges of balancing the boundaries of family formed without the genetic link with the perceived benefits of exploring the child's donor origins. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Interviews focused on openness and information-sharing were conducted with parents from one American donor insemination program. Findings are limited to individuals who were open enough to share their experiences and able to take the time to do so. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: As donor-linking services become established independently (e.g. donor insemination program registries) or by the government (e.g. Victoria, Australia's Voluntary Register), these findings provide evidence that linking services are valued by individuals affected by donor conception. Caution is warranted, however, in that some participants reported mismatched expectations, both across donor-linked families and within families (e.g. between partners), suggesting the need for information and guidance both during and after matching. Overall, the range and balance of reported positives and negatives indicate that donor-linking can provide individuals with support and donor origins information-which are particularly important when these are not available elsewhere. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: Clark University provided support. No competing interests.

Adolescents with open-identity sperm donors: reports from 12-17 year olds.

BACKGROUND: Donor insemination programs can include 'open-identity' sperm donors, who are willing to release their identities to adult offspring. We report findings from adolescent offspring who have open-identity donors. METHODS: Using mail-back questionnaires, youths from 29 households (41.4% headed by lesbian couples, 37.9% by single women, 20.7% by heterosexual couples) reported their experience growing up knowing how they were conceived and their interest in the donor's identity. RESULTS: Most youths (75.9%) reported always knowing, and were somewhat to very comfortable with their conception origins. All but one felt knowing had a neutral to positive impact on their relationship with their birth mother and, separately, co-parent. The youths' top question about the donor was, 'What's he like?' and >80% felt at least moderately likely to request his identity and pursue contact. Finally, of those who might contact the donor, 82.8% would do so to learn more about him, with many believing it would help them learn more about themselves. No youth reported wanting money and few (6.9%) wanted a father/child relationship. We also discuss differences found among youths from different household types. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of the youths felt comfortable with their origins and planned to obtain their donor's identity, although not necessarily at age 18.

Choosing identity-release sperm donors: the parents' perspective 13-18 years later.

BACKGROUND: A growing number of donor insemination (DI) programmes offer 'open-identity' sperm donors, who are willing to have their identity released to adult offspring. We report findings from parents who chose such donors and whose children are now adolescents. METHODS: Using mail-back questionnaires, parents from 45 households (40% headed by lesbian couples, 38% by single women, 22% by heterosexual couples) reported their experience with using an open-identity donor and disclosure about it, as well as their child's plans for donor identity-release(sm). RESULTS: Almost no parents regretted using an open-identity donor. Almost all parents had told their child about his or her DI conception early on and reported a neutral to moderately positive impact. Finally, of those who had told, almost all expected their child to obtain the donor's identity. We also discuss differences found between birth mothers and co-parents and among single women, lesbian couples, and heterosexual couples. CONCLUSIONS: Families were relatively open and positive about their use of DI and that their child could obtain the donor's identity. Disclosure did not appear to have a negative impact on the families, regardless of parental sexual orientation and relationship status.

A multicultural study of stereotyping in English-speaking countries.

Citizens of 9 different English-speaking countries (N = 619) evaluated the average, or typical, citizen of 5 English-speaking countries (Great Britain, Canada, Nigeria, United States, Australia) on 9 pairs of bipolar adjectives. Participants were drawn from Australia, Botswana, Canada, Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa, the United States, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. There were statistically significant similarities in the rankings of the 5 stimulus countries on 8 of the 9 adjective dimensions and a strong convergence of autostereotypes and heterostereotypes on many traits. The results relate to previous stereotyping research and traditional methods of assessing the accuracy of national stereotypes.

Facial attractiveness, symmetry and cues of good genes.

Cues of phenotypic condition should be among those used by women in their choice of mates. One marker of better phenotypic condition is thought to be symmetrical bilateral body and facial features. However, it is not clear whether women use symmetry as the primary cue in assessing the phenotypic quality of potential mates or whether symmetry is correlated with other facial markers affecting physical attractiveness. Using photographs of men's faces, for which facial symmetry had been measured, we found a relationship between women's attractiveness ratings of these faces and symmetry, but the subjects could not rate facial symmetry accurately. Moreover, the relationship between facial attractiveness and symmetry was still observed, even when symmetry cues were removed by presenting only the left or right half of faces. These results suggest that attractive features other than symmetry can be used to assess phenotypic condition. We identified one such cue, facial masculinity (cheek-bone prominence and a relatively longer lower face), which was related to both symmetry and full- and half-face attractiveness.