Families allege donor errors in fertility treatment
Occupied Cyprus IVF clinics are at the centre of serious allegations after several British families claimed that incorrect sperm or egg donors were used during their fertility treatments.
One couple, Beth and Laura, say concerns first emerged shortly after the birth of their second child, James. Despite carefully selecting the same anonymous sperm donor for both their children, they began to notice physical differences that raised doubts.
The couple had chosen a donor profile matching their own characteristics and explicitly requested that the same donor be used so their children would be biologically related.
Doubts confirmed through DNA testing
After years of uncertainty, the family proceeded with DNA testing. The results indicated that neither child was biologically linked to the selected donor. Further findings suggested the children were not biologically related to each other.
Subsequent accredited tests, suitable for use in UK courts, confirmed the results.
The case has become a prominent example of concerns surrounding occupied Cyprus IVF practices, raising questions about oversight and accountability.
Investigation links multiple families
The BBC investigation identified several other families who underwent treatment in IVF clinics in the occupied areas of Cyprus and reported similar concerns.
In total, families of seven children believe incorrect sperm or egg donors may have been used. Many of these families have carried out DNA tests that appear to confirm their suspicions.
Some cases are linked to the same medical professionals, intensifying concerns among experts.
Treatment process and unanswered questions
Beth and Laura received treatment at Dogus IVF Centre, where they were told sperm would be ordered from a Danish sperm bank with strict screening standards.
They selected a donor known as “Finn”, whose profile included detailed medical and personal background information. The couple say this information was important for their future children’s sense of identity.
However, after the DNA results, questions arose over whether the requested donor was ever used.
Attempts by the family to contact clinic staff involved in their treatment went unanswered. A doctor linked to the case denied responsibility for ordering sperm and questioned the reliability of initial DNA testing, while also stating she did not perform IVF procedures during the relevant period.
The clinic itself has not responded to requests for comment.
Further cases raise additional concerns
Two additional families treated more recently at another clinic established by the same doctor also believe incorrect donors were used.
In these cases, families requiring egg donors claim the donor they selected was not the one ultimately used. DNA testing appears to support these claims.
The families say they were not clearly informed that the clinic would make the final donor selection, despite being presented with profiles suggesting individual donors.
Experts warn of potential negligence
Fertility experts across Europe told the BBC that while isolated mistakes in IVF procedures can occur, repeated incidents involving the same team could indicate negligence or even deliberate misconduct.
Such cases are considered extremely serious within the field, where strict procedures are designed to prevent any mix-up of genetic material.
Regulation gaps in occupied areas
The occupied areas of Cyprus operate under a different regulatory framework, without an independent fertility authority comparable to those in countries such as the UK.
While local authorities oversee clinics, there is no equivalent body with the power to enforce standards or revoke licences in the same structured way.
Experts note that this regulatory gap, combined with lower costs and wider donor availability, has contributed to the rise of occupied Cyprus as a destination for international patients, for IVf, dentisty, and other procedures.
Clinics in the occupied areas also offer procedures that are illegal in the UK, including non-medical sex selection.
Emotional impact on families
Beyond the regulatory and medical concerns, the cases highlight the profound emotional impact on families.
Parents described feelings of shock, anger, and uncertainty after discovering that their children’s biological origins differed from what they had been told.
Experts warn that such revelations can have lasting psychological effects, particularly for children navigating questions of identity.
Despite the findings, Beth and Laura emphasised that their family bond remains unchanged.
Their children, now aware of the situation, continue to see each other as siblings.
“We’re still a family,” they said, stressing that while the experience has been deeply challenging, their priority remains their children’s wellbeing.
Also read: Remote work for eligible public sector jobs introduced April 2
For more videos and updates, check out our YouTube channel
