Maria thought she was doing the right thing by connecting with the sperm donor she used to conceive her baby through fertility giant Monash IVF.
“I had joined some forums when my son was born, there was a particular group who advocated for children knowing the donor as soon as possible,” Maria said.
“That’s why I decided to make contact.”
To begin with, the donor’s emails to Maria (not her real name) were friendly and harmless. But things took a sinister turn in January this year.
“The donor travelled to my town in rural Victoria from Perth unannounced and contacted me to ask if he could stay with us,” she said.
The man claimed he was being “stalked” and “harassed” by gangs and said they were “threatening” to sexually abuse Maria’s five-year-old son.
His “erratic behaviour” prompted her to call the police who took out a family violence intervention order against the man.
Maria asked Monash IVF to inform other families who have used the same donor of the potential safety risks.
“We could have been in danger if we had met up with him,” Maria said.
“It is a worry to me that other families will get in the same or worse situations.”
But the fertility giant has refused to warn its own patients, deciding the information provided by Maria and Victoria Police “did not meet the standards for imminent or severe threats to life”.
Maria has shared her story as part of a Four Corners investigation into the lack of accountability and transparency in Australia’s multi-million-dollar IVF industry.
‘This was a red flag’
Maria is a special needs teacher living in a small town in rural Victoria.
The solo mum had IVF in 2017 after selecting a donor code from Monash IVF’s list of clinic-recruited sperm donors.
“I chose Monash IVF due to my trust in the brand. I felt like I would be in safe hands,” Maria said.
Under Victoria’s laws at the time, Maria was required to undergo a police and child protection order check before starting her fertility treatment. The sperm donor was not.
No Australian state mandates criminal background checks for sperm donors.
The profile of Maria’s donor said he was an actor and model in his 30s who wished to help others and “carry on a genetic gift of longevity”.
He described his health as “excellent” and had ticked “no” to all health conditions for his entire family including any mental health history of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.
“Looking back, I now realise this was a red flag. It was too good to be true, as virtually every family has some history of health conditions, even if minor,” she said.
After Maria’s baby was born, she applied to connect with the man through Victoria’s donor conception Central Register, a matching service for donors, parents and their children.
It started off well; they exchanged emails, and he sent her photos of himself and his family.
“But then he sent several unsettling emails where he described being stalked, surveilled, hacked and harassed,” Maria said.
“I thought that perhaps he was having a mental health episode. I kept my replies short and supportive.”
Then, last year the donor started hounding Maria for money.
One morning alone he sent six emails in less than an hour.
“I’m so ashamed to grovel and beg … I have no money what so ever.
“This is so humiliating to ask my biological sons mother for financial assistance but it’s urgent.
“PLEASE HELP.”
Maria said she relented and transferred the donor a few hundred dollars.
“Maybe I was a bit naive but I wanted to preserve some relationship with the donor for my son.
“He was saying he was homeless and had nowhere to sleep … everywhere he stayed he thought he was being stalked.”
As the months went on, the behaviour continued to escalate.
‘I never in a million years thought he’d travel here’
In January, Maria was away on holiday with her son when she received another troubling email.
“Im at Perth airport and I need your help … Can I please stay with you until I find a job and my own accommodation? … SOS.”
Maria’s friends urged her not to reply.
Two days later, she received another email saying he’d arrived in her town.
“I felt totally in shock … I never in a million years thought he’d travel here.
“He said in his emails that he wanted to meet ‘our’ son and be there for his first day of school and upcoming birthday.”
When Maria called the local police to ask for advice, she said officers told her the man was currently at the police station claiming he was being stalked and harassed through his bluetooth speakers.
Police took out a family violence intervention order on her behalf.
The order states police “have concerns for [Maria] and her son’s safety due to the erratic nature” of the man and “concerns he will turn up to [Maria’s] house with his unpredictable nature and put [Maria] and her son at risk”.
Monash IVF is mentioned in the police report and an officer spoke to the clinic about the incident.
Maria also reported her experience to the fertility giant. She told Monash IVF she was worried that the donor seemed to be having delusions, including about her son’s safety.
She asked the clinic to inform other families who’d used the donor about his mental health issues, the health implications for his biological children and the safety risk he posed to them.
Monash IVF offered her some “supportive counselling sessions”.
But Maria said in her final counselling session, she was told Monash IVF had decided not to contact other families because there was “no proof” of the donor’s mental health issues and that his communications with the clinic didn’t raise any red flags.
‘Unheard and unsupported’
Astounded by Monash IVF’s response and fearful for the safety of other families, Maria made a formal complaint to the company about how it handled the incident.
“This lack of acknowledgement of the distressing events I encountered has left me feeling unheard and unsupported,” she wrote in the complaint.
“I have experienced trouble sleeping and have had to take extra security measures at home.”
Maria told Monash IVF that she’d discovered the donor had court appearances dating back to July 2018, including charges related to family violence, assault of a public officer, common assault and possession of drug paraphernalia.
She shared copies of the donor’s emails as well as videos and audio he sent her in which he talks about having things “inserted” into him against his will and gremlins who control his computer.
A clinical psychologist providing independent advice to Maria on her complaint assessed the material and said the donor was “experiencing psychosis, which is a feature of schizophrenia, where someone has difficulty distinguishing between reality and hallucinations or delusions”.
But Monash IVF still refused to act.
It told Maria that while it “appreciates the information you’ve shared and recognise the emotional impact the interactions with your donor have had on you, we are unable to confirm the presence of genetic or hereditary conditions that could pose risks to other recipients or their children at this time”.
The clinic said it had sought legal advice regarding “potential actions to prevent harm or preserve lives” but it said, “the resulting analysis determined that the information provided did not meet the standards for imminent or severe threats to life”.
Instead, Monash IVF recommended that Maria record her concerns with Victoria’s Voluntary Register.
Maria says this means other recipient families would need to contact her directly for information about her experience and the donor’s mental health.
“Altogether there are 10 children from this donor and 8 families.
“I feel that it is unfair that I have to potentially retell this troubling incident numerous times, when it has already caused me a considerable amount of distress.”
Monash IVF told Four Corners it cannot comment on specific cases.
It said it treats any concerns raised by donors or recipients “seriously and sensitively”.
“We balance the rights of all participants in the donor program, including donors, recipients, their partners and any children born,” it said in a statement.
“We also advise our recipient families to carefully consider the circumstances and consequences of meeting their donors.”
Earlier this month, Maria made a complaint about the clinic’s conduct to the industry-funded national regulator the Reproductive Technology Accreditation Committee (RTAC), which is responsible for auditing clinics against a Code of Practice and granting licenses.
She says RTAC is yet to respond or acknowledge her complaint.
Watch Four Corners’ full investigation When IVF Goes Wrong now on ABC iview.
Be first to know about Four Corners’ next big story: subscribe to the newsletter and follow on Facebook.