California Informal Sperm Donation

Legal Framework and Considerations

In California, informal sperm donation, including at-home artificial insemination (AI), is addressed under the California Family Code, particularly FAM § 7613 and FAM § 7613.5. Section 7613 provides a clinic/physician-or-bank path in (b)(1) and a separate path in (b)(2) for semen not provided to a licensed physician or sperm bank when there is a qualifying pre-conception non-parent agreement (written, or oral proved by clear and convincing evidence). That (b)(2) path is what makes carefully documented informal AI workable without a physician mandate. § 7613.5 supplies optional statutory forms. Sexual intercourse is outside this assisted-reproduction framework. Content aligned to official LegInfo text as of July 2026.

Official excerpt — Fam. Code § 7613(b)(2) (abridged): If the semen is not provided to a licensed physician and surgeon or a licensed sperm bank as specified in paragraph (1), the donor of semen for use in assisted reproduction by a woman other than the donor’s spouse is treated in law as if the donor is not the natural parent of a child thereby conceived if either: (A) the donor and the woman signed a written agreement before conception that the donor would not be a parent; or (B) a court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the child was conceived through assisted reproduction and that, prior to conception, the woman and the donor had an oral agreement that the donor would not be a parent. Source: leginfo.legislature.ca.gov — FAM § 7613. Always re-check for amendments.
Historical case (superseded as current CA black letter) — Jhordan C. v. Mary K., 179 Cal. App. 3d 386, 224 Cal. Rptr. 530 (1986) (Court of Appeal): Applied the then-governing physician-only rule in former Civ. Code § 7005(b) (UPA-1973 style). “By statute in California a ‘donor of semen provided to a licensed physician for use in artificial insemination of a woman other than the donor’s wife is treated in law as if he were not the natural father of a child thereby conceived.’ … [W]here impregnation takes place by artificial insemination, and the parties have failed to take advantage of this statutory basis for preclusion of paternity, the donor of semen can be determined to be the father of the child in a paternity action.” Semen went personally to the recipient, not to a physician; the known donor was declared the legal father. “Accordingly, section 7005, subdivision (b), by its terms does not apply to the present case.” Chronology: § 7005 was repealed/recodified; today’s controlling text is Fam. Code § 7613. The Legislature later added § 7613(b)(2)—a non-clinic path when there is a qualifying pre-conception non-parent agreement (written, or oral by clear and convincing evidence). That change overturns Jhordan’s practical result for properly documented informal AI: under current law, a physician is no longer the only route to donor non-parentage. Jhordan remains useful comparative history (and still cited elsewhere for classic physician-gate statutes), but it is not California’s current rule for informal arrangements that meet § 7613(b)(2). Current path: (b)(1) clinic/bank or (b)(2) agreement. July 2026.

California statutory forms for assisted reproduction (§ 7613.5)

Official source (forms are printed in the statute): Family Code § 7613.5 on California LegInfo — open and use the “California Statutory Forms for Assisted Reproduction”

California is unusual in putting optional, fill-in statutory form language directly into the Family Code. Under Fam. Code § 7613.5, an intended parent may, but is not required to, use the forms in that section to show intent to be a legal parent of a child conceived through assisted reproduction. The Legislature designed them to:

  • Satisfy the writing requirement in § 7613 when a writing is needed (including the informal / non-clinic path under § 7613(b)(2) for donor non-parentage);
  • Clarify intentions at conception among intended parents using assisted reproduction (including with sperm and/or egg donation);
  • Provide standardized language parties and courts can recognize—without replacing attorney drafting when facts are complex.

How to use them (and what they do not do)

  1. Read the official forms on LegInfo first. Open § 7613.5 and scroll to subsection (e), “optional California Statutory Forms for Assisted Reproduction.” Copy or adapt only the form that matches your situation (e.g., Form 1 addresses two married or unmarried intended parents conceiving with donation where one will give birth).
  2. They are optional. § 7613.5(a) and (d) state that using these particular forms is not mandatory to satisfy § 7613’s writing requirement—another proper writing can work—but the statutory forms are the Legislature’s template for clarity.
  3. They apply only in limited circumstances. § 7613.5(b) warns parties to read the forms carefully and confirm they qualify. § 7613.5(c): these forms do not apply to gestational-carrier / surrogacy assisted-reproduction agreements (those use different Family Code rules).
  4. Donor non-parentage is not automatic from Form 1 alone. The statutory Form 1 text itself warns that signing the intended-parent form does not terminate a sperm donor’s parentage claim. Under § 7613(b), a sperm donor’s claim is terminated if (i) sperm is provided to a licensed physician and surgeon or licensed sperm bank before insemination, or (ii) conception is by assisted reproduction (not sexual intercourse) and there is a qualifying pre-conception written agreement that the donor will not be a parent (or the clear-and-convincing oral-agreement path). Intended parents and the donor typically need the right combination of § 7613 writings—not only an intended-parent form.
  5. They do not wipe other parentage doctrines. § 7613.5(a): the forms do not affect § 7611 presumptions and do not stop a court from considering other parentage claims under California law.
  6. Execute before conception when § 7613 requires pre-conception writings for the donor non-parentage path; keep signed copies; consider notarization and counsel for multi-parent, multi-state, or contested-intent situations.
Official excerpt — Fam. Code § 7613.5(a) (abridged): An intended parent may, but is not required to, use the forms set forth in this section to demonstrate the intent to be a legal parent of a child conceived through assisted reproduction. These forms shall satisfy the writing requirement specified in Section 7613, and are designed to provide clarity regarding the intentions, at the time of conception, of intended parents using assisted reproduction. These forms do not affect any presumptions of parentage based on Section 7611, and do not preclude a court from considering any other claims to parentage under California statute or case law. Full text and all form templates: leginfo.legislature.ca.gov — FAM § 7613.5 (also linked as § 7613.5 alternate LegInfo view). Related donor rule: FAM § 7613.

Not legal advice. Form choice and signature logistics should be reviewed with a California family-law attorney when rights, multi-state residence, or later contact with the donor are at stake.

Core Provisions

Provision Statute Key Implications
Assisted Reproduction § 7613(b) Defines as methods causing pregnancy other than sexual intercourse, including AI (at-home/clinical), IVF, and gamete/embryo donation. No physician required for informal AI; donor protections apply via intent.
Donor Non-Parentage § 7613(b)(2) Donors have no parental rights or duties for children conceived via assisted reproduction if non-spousal and pre-conception written agreement exists (or oral with clear evidence). Applies to informal AI.
Statutory AR forms § 7613.5 Optional Legislature-drafted forms (in the code text) that can satisfy § 7613 writings and document intended-parent intent. Not required; not for surrogacy; Form 1 warns it does not alone terminate a sperm donor’s claim—see forms section.
Intent / presumptions § 7611 Parentage presumptions (e.g., marriage/domestic partnership). Forms under § 7613.5 do not displace § 7611. Unmarried non-birthing parents may still need voluntary declaration or judgment.
Custody & Child Support § 4050 et seq. (Support) & § 3000 et seq. (Custody) Non-parents (donors) owe no support; custody defaults to birth/intended parents. Disputes resolved via intent evidence and best interests, not biology alone.
Withdrawal/Disputes & Surrogacy § 7960 et seq. (Surrogacy) Written agreements required for surrogacy with validation; informal donation under broader UPA. Post-birth disputes via adjudication; cross-state via UIFSA.

Key court cases (chronology matters)

Outlook: California’s current informal-AI regime is statutory (§ 7613(b)(1) or (b)(2) + optional § 7613.5 forms)—not the 1986 Jhordan physician-only rule. Risk today is failure to meet the current statute (no clinic path and no qualifying agreement), not that Jhordan remains controlling. Reviewed July 2026.

Practical Steps & Risks

Resources