At least 30 children, most of them British, are feared to have been conceived through IVF treatment in northern Cyprus using sperm or egg donors different from those selected by their parents, according to a BBC investigation.
The parents involved say they carefully chose anonymous donors based on details including medical history, physical appearance, personality, education and hobbies, but later became concerned that the requested donors were not used during their fertility treatment.
The findings are an expansion of an investigation that previously identified seven suspected cases.
Half of the 30 children were conceived through procedures at the Dogus IVF Centre, where several patients were treated by Dr Firdevs Uguz Tip, Dr Sevket Alpturk and patient co-ordinator Julie Hodson.
Parents have accused members of the clinic’s staff of misleading them over the identities of their children’s biological donors. Firdevs has denied wrongdoing, while Alpturk and Hodson have not responded to the allegations.
The BBC also reported that Cryos International, described as the world’s largest sperm bank, blacklisted Dogus in 2016.
Northern Cyprus, which is recognised internationally only by Turkey and where European Union laws do not apply, has become a popular destination for British patients seeking comparatively cheaper fertility treatment.
The territory’s fertility clinics offer a wide range of donor options, but the sector is subject to less stringent regulation than in many European countries.
Following the emergence of the allegations, the Northern Cyprus Ministry of Health said it had launched an investigation. However, the ministry has not responded to repeated BBC requests for an update.
The investigation found that 11 of the 30 children had undergone commercial DNA testing, with results indicating genetic ancestry from Turkey or neighbouring regions.
The findings have intensified concerns that the donors requested by their parents may not have been used.
The majority of the cases involving DNA tests were linked to IVF procedures carried out between 2012 and 2024 at Dogus.
Families are now facing uncertainty over the identities and medical histories of their children’s biological donors.
Laura Bridgens, founder of Donor Conceived UK, described the reports as deeply troubling. “It’s a fundamental human right for a donor-conceived person to know the truth about their origins.”
One mother, identified as Rachel, said she spent years suspecting that the sperm donor she selected had not been used during her treatment at Dogus in 2012.
Rachel selected an anonymous Danish donor through Cryos International, whose profile stated that he would be willing to be identified by his offspring when they reached 18.
She said that opportunity was important to her because she wanted her child to have the option of learning about and contacting his biological father in the future.
However, after becoming pregnant following treatment in northern Cyprus, Rachel said clinic staff repeatedly failed to provide a medical report confirming that the selected donor’s sperm had been used.
Her concerns deepened after her son, Jonah, was born and his physical appearance differed significantly from both Rachel and the characteristics described in the donor’s profile.
After the BBC’s earlier investigation, Rachel and Jonah, now 13, underwent DNA testing.
The results indicated that Jonah was Rachel’s biological son but did not match the ancestry associated with the donor she had selected.
The BBC subsequently contacted Cryos, which said it had no record of ever supplying sperm to Dogus, despite the clinic having promoted its relationship with the Danish sperm bank.
Rachel said the revelation had raised further concerns about whether Jonah might have biological siblings conceived using the same unidentified donor. “I wouldn’t be surprised if there are genetic siblings out there.”
Experts Raise Concerns Over Possible Systemic Failures
Fertility experts consulted by the BBC said the scale of the allegations was highly unusual.
They said accidental use of an incorrect donor during IVF treatment was extremely rare and that multiple cases could indicate negligence or deliberate deception.
The British Fertility Society described the allegations as evidence of a potential “systemic problem” extending beyond a single doctor or clinic.
Of the 15 cases connected to Dogus, six involved patients treated by Alpturk, the clinic’s owner and responsible manager.
According to the Northern Cyprus government, the responsible manager is required to approve procedures and activities at the clinic.
Alpturk has not responded to questions.
Another nine cases involved Firdevs, who treated the patients while working at Dogus.
Firdevs has denied misleading patients and said Alpturk was responsible for signing off procedures at the clinic.
She was also the doctor involved in nine other cases at two clinics after leaving Dogus in 2015, with most linked to Miracle IVF, which she currently runs.
Firdevs said her clinic complies with the law and that patients sign consent forms explaining how donors are selected. Several parents interviewed, however, said they had not been adequately informed about the process.
Hodson, who was the main contact for many British patients at Dogus, was also repeatedly involved in the cases.
Emails reviewed reportedly showed her telling patients that Firdevs would arrange orders for sperm from Cryos.
Firdevs, however, said obtaining sperm was not part of her responsibilities and that she was unaware patients had been told otherwise.
Hodson did not respond to questions about whether she failed to place orders with Cryos or failed to communicate patients’ requests to Dogus staff.
Cryos chief executive Ole Schou said he was shocked by the number of families who could have been affected.
The sperm bank disclosed that it had blacklisted Dogus in 2016 after concerns that the clinic had failed to order Cryos sperm for a patient despite telling the patient that it would.
Cryos has also suspended its relationship with Firdevs and Miracle IVF pending the outcome of the Northern Cyprus government’s investigation.
Firdevs said she had been cleared of breaching any laws, although it was said that it was unable to independently verify the claim with the territory’s Ministry of Health.
For the affected families, however, the central question remains unanswered: who were the biological donors used in their children’s treatments?
Rachel said the discovery had not changed her love for Jonah but had taken away an important part of the information she wanted him to have about his origins. “For a child trying to figure out who they are in the world, it could be really important,” she said of the opportunity to contact a biological donor.
She added that although Jonah had reacted positively to learning about his Turkish and southern European ancestry, the circumstances surrounding his conception remained deeply troubling. “Even so, what happened is not OK. It’s a huge deal and could have been absolutely traumatising for him.”
Erizia Rubyjeana
Follow us on:
