With the significant increase in the numbers of donor-conceived individuals (38,910 live babies were born in 2005 as a result of 134,260 ART cycles performed at reporting U.S. clinics in 2005, compared with 20,659 babies born as a result of 64,036 ART cycles in 1996), many have questioned the ethics surrounding the technologies and human decisions surrounding donor conception, and there has been plenty of controversy.
For example, the term "Snowflake baby" was coined in reference to unused frozen embryos (left over from other couples' attempts to conceive through in vitro fertilization) that have been "adopted" by families.
[3] The psychological and social impacts of assisted reproductive technologies (ART) on donor-conceived children and their families has gained a great deal of interest in recent years as this population has continued to grow.
An increasing number of family-support organizations strongly encourage parents to openly discuss their children's origins, whether through donor insemination or following treatment with donated gametes, because research suggest that donor conceived people who learn the nature of their conception at a young age do not suffer psychologically but that those who learn about their conception at a later age may feel lied to or betrayed.
Clinics and sperm banks facilitate the transaction that allows for prospective parents to become pregnant with donated gametes.
[10] Due to the advent of genetic genealogy and DNA databases, even sperm donors who have not initiated contact through a registry are now increasingly being traced by their offspring.
[11] Possibly the first such case was in 2005, when it was revealed in New Scientist magazine that a fifteen-year-old had used information from a DNA test and the Internet to identify and contact his sperm donor.
[12] In 2018, it was reported that DNA testing has led to a significant increase in donor-conceived people finding their siblings and sperm donors.