1880s. – first public record of donor insemination (AID). Iin the USA. Carried out without the woman’s knowledge; husband informed afterwards
By mid twentieth century – several UK clinics. AID considered socially and morally unacceptable. Only for heterosexual couples – told it was better for children not to know. Later emerged doctors were not always open with patients about whose sperm was used.
The Departmental Committee on Human Artificial Insemination (1958–1960), or Feversham Committee set up – to investigate legal, social, and moral implications of human artificial insemination, and decide whether new laws were required. Concluded AID was “undesirable” and socially risky; recommended against its legalisation.
1978 – birth in England of Louise Brown, world’s first IVF baby
1984 Report on Human Fertilisation & Embryology, commonly called the Warnock Report after its Chair Mary Warnock, a moral philosopher. Remit – to consider whether to regulate the field of assisted reproduction and embryo research. Recommended need for an independent statutory authority to license and monitor fertility clinics and limit embryo research). Said IVFshould be recognized as legitimate medical treatment; need for ethical guardrails around surrogacy, gametes donation, and storage. Donors to be anonymous.
1985 Surrogacy Arrangements Act in response to ‘Baby Cotton’ surrogacy story – aimed at stopping commercial surrogacy.
Voluntary Licensing Authority then an Interim Statutory Licensing Authority established.
The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990, enacted 1st August 1991. Created HFEA (Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority), the world’s first statutory body of its kind. To regulate and shape policy. to license and inspect treatment clinics and embryo research; to publish a Code of Practice for clinics setting out both statutory duties and guidance; to establish the HFEA mandatory Register of Information to record all licensed cycles, donations and births (where known); Also:
- clarification of parental relationships including that donors would be anonymous and recipient parents would be legal parents;
- for surrogacy, a requirement for a post-birth court process to transfer legal parenthood from surrogates to intended parents but only if they were heterosexual couples and met certain conditions
.
Early 1990s – British Association of Social Workers (BASW) set up the Project Group on Assisted Reproduction, now simply called PROGAR – https://bit.ly/4dBheN9. A multi agency, multi-disciplinary group with DC adults and parents as members.
In 1993, the pro-openness Donor Conception Network for parents and families established.
Key debates going forwards were focussed on the welfare of children involved – opponents of lifting donor anonymity arguing there was no evidence of harm to them and that it would lead to shortage of donors. Advocates argued there was ‘harm from secrecy’ (including from adoption and family work and on health grounds) – and that decision was not about ‘supply and demand’.
1998 UK’s Human Rights Act 1998, enacted 2nd October 2000.
In December 2001, Chair of PROGAR was invited to give a keynote address to HFEA Annual Conference entitled ‘Why Anonymity?’
Department of Health public consultation titled Providing information about gamete or embryo donors ran to July 2002. I
May 2002 PROGAR held national day conference in London, funded by Nuffield Foundation, entitled ‘Donor Information Consultation: Providing information about sperm egg and embryo donors’. Keynote speaker was Baroness Mary Warnock who for first time stated publicly that anonymity was the denial of a fundamental moral right. Other influential figures on the platform – included DC adults and family members. Major media coverage.
Department of Health’s national consultation reported – strong public and (some) stakeholder support for donor-conceived individuals having access to their donor’s identity at age 18.
2002 – National Council for Civil Liberties (now Liberty) on behalf of Joanna Rose and E.M. (a minor) vs Secretary of State for Health. Court found there was a human rights case to answer. So although it didn’t proceed any further in the courts, this was enough to add pressure to the case for lifting donor anonymity.
HFEA got a new Chair, Suzi Leather, and a new Chief Executive, Angela McNab. Change in its culture towards openness.
January 2003 – Public Health Minister Hazel Blears, announced that Government accepted ‘a strong argument in principle” for donor-conceived individuals to be able to find out the identity of their donors. Announced a six-month delay to allow for targeted research and consultation with fertility clinics and donors regarding potential impact on donor supply. Also announced government funding to help establish a voluntary contact register for donor-conceived individuals and donors prior to the start of legislation.
After Adoption Yorkshire agreed to establish the voluntary register, the first in the world to use DNA to help DC adults and donors from pre 1991 to connect. Called UK DonorLink and launched in April 2004. Its current successor is the Donor Conceived Register and the Registrants Panel originally set up by UK DonorLink was retained and was the forerunner of DCUK!.
January 2004 – Melanie Johnson, new Public Health Minister, confirmed the Government’s decision to end donor anonymity at HFEA Annual Conference
2004 Regulations to lift donor anonymity implemented prospectively in April 2005 with a transitional period to 31 March 2006. Those born between August 1991 and April 2005 only group left with no access to a register.
New Donor Registrations did not drop!
Pre 2005 donors allowed to re-register as identifiable; despite no publicity campaign at any stage since, a number have done so.
Late 2004, HFEA public consultation – SEED Review (Sperm, Egg and Embryo Donation), final report published October 2005. First major comprehensive review of gamete donation policies. Said donation must be “cost neutral”, capping donor expenses/loss-of-earnings compensation at £250 per donation cycle. It also approved and standardized the framework for egg-sharing schemes.
March 2005, House of Commons Science and Technology Committee published major report: Human Reproductive Technologies and the Law. Those giving oral evidence included DC adults, DC parents Strong recommendations including:
- The child’s right to genetic identity outweighed the convenience of anonymous donation in relation to whether the supply of donors was affected.
- There should be a shift away from historic secrecy toward openness, encouraging parents to tell children about their donor origins early in life.
Supported lifting barriers to DC treatments for single women, lesbian couples and minority groups and said policies should reflect psychological evidence on parenting quality rather than rigid, traditional family definitions.
Coincided with Department of Health national consultation reviewing the 1990 Act.
From 1st April 2006, HFEA shifted from allowing maximum 10 children per donor to maximum 10 families per donor and no limit on number of children within each family.
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 – included changes to legal parenthood (including extending eligibility following surrogacy to same sex married couples and couples in civil partnerships or living together in an enduring family relationship); changed wording of the ‘welfare of the child’ requirement from ‘need for a father’ to ‘need for supportive parenting’); established the voluntary Donor Sibling Register for those aged 18 and over but not to non-DC children of donors. Solidified infrastructure allowing donor-conceived individuals to apply, when eligible, to the HFEA Register for donor identifying details.
2010-11, another HFEA review – “Donation: Have Your Say”,commonly called The Donation Review Final decisions implemented in April 2012. Included replacing “expenses-only” for donors to fixed flat-rate compensation; permitted donors travelling from overseas to receive fixed compensation rate.
Some later changes include:
2019 Regulations – eligibility for Parental Orders following surrogacy extended to single applicants, providing they have a genetic link to the child
2023 – Opening the Register for the first 18 year olds eligible to apply for identifying donor information – PLUS
Consultations on new legislation:
- The Law Commissions of England & Wales and Scotland consulted on surrogacy law reform from June to October 2019 and reported in March 2023, recommending legislation that included changes to the birth registration system to include information about donors used in surrogacy arrangements.
- The HFEA consulted on ‘Modernising the regulation of fertility treatment and research involving human embryos’ from February to April 2023 but explicitly ruled out from its consultation making any changes retrospective. It reported in November 2023. Among other matters, it recommended a shift towards donors being identifiable from birth.
The government announced that it had no plans at present to introduce new legislation on either.
Marilyn Crawshaw, July 2026
Marilyn Crawshaw – https://www.york.ac.uk/business-society/people/marilyn-crawshaw/ has been involved in trying to influence policy and practice in relation to donor conception policy and practice since the mid 1980s. This has been through her experiences as a maternity and gynae social worker; an academic conducting research with DC adults, DC parents, donors, adoptive parents, and professionals; a policy adviser; a lay HFEA Social & Ethical Inspector and member of its stakeholder groups; and an activist. She has been a member of PROGAR since 1994 and its Chair since 2013 and also has strong links internationally with others working and/ or lobbying in this field.
Leave a Reply