The sperm donor loophole that led to 27 half-siblings

The young engineer was everything Kathy wanted in a sperm donor.

Andrew Veitch, a 32-year-old from Melbourne’s north-west, boasted of excellent health, a sperm count five times that of the average male’s and an altruistic desire to help 10 women become mothers.

Academics, fertility experts and the mothers of donor-conceived children are urging governments to create a register for online sperm donation.Credit: Marija Ercegovac

But Kathy, using a false name to protect her child’s identity, would later discover that between 2020 and 2024, Veitch far exceeded this figure by donating his sperm to 15 women he met online, creating 27 half-siblings.

This masthead has interviewed and obtained statements from 10 of the 15 women who conceived using Veitch’s sperm after meeting him on a popular Facebook page that matches sperm donors with those wanting to start or expand their families, as well as an app that connects people with donor sperm and eggs.

Andrew Veitch donated his sperm to 15 women he met online.

The women were shocked to discover the scale of Veitch’s prolific sperm donating after connecting online about six weeks ago.

“I was in a vulnerable position ... I was desperate to conceive,” said Kathy. “I feel deceived and taken advantage of at one of the most delicate points in my life.”

Many of these siblings live within a few kilometres of each other and some have regularly come into close contact in the community without realising they were related.

The situation highlights the pitfalls of online sperm donation, an unregulated space that is growing in popularity and allows people to bypass the costs and bureaucracy of regulated IVF clinics, where out-of-pocket expenses can range from $4000 to $7500 and patients often face delays accessing donor sperm.

While men who donate sperm to IVF clinics in Victoria must comply with a 10-family limit, there are no rules governing how many families online sperm donors can contribute to.

Five women interviewed by this masthead claimed that they felt pressured by Veitch – who used the online alias Andrew Bartos – to have natural insemination (or sex) when they met in person.

These five women, who are predominantly solo mothers by choice or in same-sex relationships, said they had initially requested artificial insemination, which involves using a syringe to aim sperm into the cervix or uterus.

Veitch denies pressuring any women into having natural insemination. This masthead is not suggesting that he committed sexual assault or committed any crime.

“Andrew pushed hard to be more involved than I was comfortable with, and when it came to my fertile window, he pressured me to opt for natural insemination, claiming it had the highest success rate,” one woman recalled.

Another woman, who wanted to try natural insemination, went to great lengths to avoid seeing Veitch during sex. She rigged up a sheet from her bedroom ceiling, which draped down to her bed, creating a visual barrier. She alleges that Veitch shared this image with other women he met online, claiming it was taken in his old house.

“It was purely business,” said the mother who rigged up the sheet. “There wasn’t any enjoyment on my part. There wasn’t anything in it for me aside from having a baby.”

Some of the online conversations were highly sexual, according to screenshots of Facebook messages obtained by this masthead. Veitch asked one couple to send nude photos of themselves and asked another whether she wanted foreplay. Veitch, through his lawyer, said he did not recall asking a woman if she wanted foreplay.

In one screenshot of a Facebook message obtained by this masthead, Veitch sends one of the mothers a photo of a woman in skimpy lingerie, lying face down on a bed with her buttocks in the air. “What about a pic like you both like this? No faces,” he asks.

The mothers are speaking out because they are concerned their children might have more half-siblings that they are unaware of.

“What does it mean for my daughter when she gets older and starts dating?” one mother asked. Another said: “It’s scary to think a whole class of kids are related.”

Academics, fertility experts and the mothers of donor-conceived children are urging governments to create a register for online sperm donation (also known as informal sperm donation) and limits on how many families online sperm donors can contribute to.

“The unregulated practice of online sperm donation can pose significant ethical, legal and health issues for donors, recipients and donor-conceived children,” said Associate Professor Dr Neera Bhatia, the director of law, health and society research at Deakin Law School.

“This includes the very real risk of donor-conceived children unknowingly forming relationships or coming into close contact with their half-siblings in the short and long term due to the sheer number of donations that have been made.”

Associate Professor Neera Bhatia from Deakin University says finding a sperm donor online carries huge risks. Credit: Eddie Jim

Bhatia, who was contacted this year by a group of mothers who conceived using Veitch’s sperm, said many women who use online sperm donors were vulnerable due to their intense desire to fall pregnant.

“Women deserve safety and transparency when using an informal sperm donor,” she said.

In a letter sent to the mothers in late May, Veitch’s lawyer, Courtney du Toit, shared a spreadsheet that provided anonymous details of the 29 children born to her client, such as the state and year they were born in and whether they were a twin. This had since been revised to 27 children, du Toit said.

While one mother is in Queensland, the rest are in Victoria. The children were all born between December 2020 and June 2025, with one due next month. There are three sets of twins.

“I have advised him to immediately cease donating and to promise that he will not allow any further children to be born via sperm donating by him,” du Toit wrote to the mothers.

In a detailed response to questions from this masthead, du Toit said her client was motivated by his desire to help others. She said demand for known donors had significantly increased during Melbourne’s COVID-19 lockdowns, which had prevented access to fertility treatments.

“My client considered family limits to be more of a ‘guide’, that they were only in practice applicable to the clinics, and that he would be letting women down – who had been searching for the right donor and trying desperately to conceive,” she said.

She said her client, who was conceived using IVF, considered donating to an IVF clinic but was discouraged by a family member.

“He also instructs that he felt it was less ‘personal’ anyway,” said du Toit.

When asked if he had any concerns about the implications of his prolific donating, Veitch responded through his lawyer: “Now I do because I’m being educated.”

“I did think about these babies growing up and wanting to see me and maybe even know me,” he said. “But I didn’t think about the real consequences at the time. I didn’t think about child support because it was fine, and then people got angry. I didn’t think it would be like this.”

Veitch said his last two donations in 2023 were to two women who already had children with him and who had requested his help again.

He said he would like donors and recipients to receive education and counselling before conception.

Adam Hooper, who runs the Sperm Donation Australia Facebook page where many of the women met Veitch, said Veitch was banned from the group in February 2021 after contacting a woman and suggesting natural insemination when she had requested artificial insemination.

Hooper said this was a clear breach of the group’s rules.

“He was very popular, especially with single women who were actually hoping he would become their partner,” he said.

Hooper said the Facebook group, which has 21,000 members, strongly advises people to pick a donor that links all recipients in a group.

Through his lawyer, Veitch said he had never been banned from the Sperm Donation Australia group but had not been a member since about 2023.

The Family and Federal Circuit Court.Credit: Fairfax Media

In an unusual move, du Toit recently tried to file an undertaking on Veitch’s behalf in the Federal Circuit and Family Court stating that he would no longer donate his sperm.

But a duty registrar at the court rejected this undertaking as there were no proceedings before the court.

“The registrar is also not satisfied that the court has the power to regulate private arrangements as contemplated by the proposed undertaking, in the absence of reference to specific legislative provisions,” a court employee wrote in an email that du Toit shared with the women.

Speaking to this masthead, du Toit said informal donations allowed people to know their donor, see their features and get a feel for their character. She said that while IVF clinics could feel artificial, informal donation was more natural.

On the downside, she said there were no rules or protections governing informal donations.

She said there was very little awareness or education in online sperm donor communities about the legal implications of natural insemination, which results in a presumption of legal parentage.

“It is clear that the people who run these sites are not qualified to be ‘educating’ donors and recipient parents on what best protects all parties, including the children created as a result of these donations,” she said.

Many of the women said they would not have chosen Veitch as a donor if they had been aware he was such a prolific donor.

“Yeh 10 women I think would be my maximum,” he wrote to one of the mothers after she asked him if he had a limit on his sperm donating.

They would like online sperm donation to be regulated to better protect women, donors and donor-conceived children.

Health Minister Mark Butler.Credit: Alex Ellinghausen

“We need a change with the law so that this doesn’t happen in the future,” one mother said. “There are no legal ramifications. Don’t get me wrong, I am all for private donating, but it needs to be done right.”

Rebecca Kerner, chair of the Australia and New Zealand Infertility Counsellors Association, has written to Federal Health Minister Mark Butler three times to express grave concerns about the unregulated world of online semen donors, and to call for a national donor register.

Kerner said this would allow family limits to be monitored for sperm donors who donate to clinics, as well as those who donate more informally through online groups and apps.

“We have long been concerned about prolific semen donors who are seemingly donating their semen altruistically, but with literally no limits involved, often no documentation that identifies how many children are created and no follow up,” she said.

There are health risks too. Kerner said that unlike IVF clinics, sperm donated informally was not screened for sexually transmitted infections or genetic diseases.

A federal Department of Health spokesman said it was aware of the association’s concerns about semen donors advertising online.

“In Australia, egg and sperm (gamete) donation through clinics is regulated by respective state and territory governments,” she said.

*name has been changed for privacy reasons