P-055 Four decades of sperm donation: Motivation and attitudes among donors

Abstract Study question How has the attitudes and motivation towards donation among sperm donors developed through years from 1992, 2002, 2012 to 2022? Summary answer Altruism economic compensation remain primary motivations, but there are significant changes in responses for certain life attitude-questions current previous years. What is known already The growing application of medically-assisted reproduction (MAR) made treatment with donor commonplace, recent more people have been seeking pregnancy using sperm. With global shortage donors, it important seek opinion population on perspectives anonymity, information-sharing, feelings donor-conceived children, as well psychological factors related being a donor. Previous studies shown that altruism changing aspects interest all who maintain donation. design, size, duration study was based same questionnaire three preceding decades few updated modifications 2022-setup. Active Danish bank Cryos International were invited by email participate period June 9th July 1st 2022. This one largest its kind donors. Participants/materials, setting, methods Results 173 compared answers bank: 1992 (n = 39), 2002 58), 91). In 2022, could choose between ID-release (formerly non-anonymous) non-ID-release (anonymous). Anonymized provided questionnaires analyzed statistically compare ID-groups investigate surveys use Chi-Squared tests logistic regression. Main results role chance There increase proportion 29% 54% altruistic helping childless most factor both Still, an invariable term condition. general willing donate same-sex couples (80%) single women (68%), 55% positive transgender males. Logistic regression showed likely want information about offspring (OR 1.80, [95% CI 1.02, 3.16]), while no association having partner. Also, status intending inform or future children their 1.73, 95% 1.10, 6.85) observed. Having partner not significantly associated wanting donations 0.65, 0.90, 1.05). findings this presented evidence homogeneous relation several had diverse opinions mutual sharing. Limitations, reasons caution number participants increased 39 yet approved included, unlike following All anonymous due legislation. Only differentiate ID-types. Wider implications clearly shows needs across Different suggest profiles fit different requirements. It advisable continually update services donors’ concerning information. Trial registration Not applicable