Pavel Durov and over 100 children: the story behind his sperm donations

How many children does he actually have?

The linked sources do not provide an independently verified total. In June 2025, Durov told Le Point that he had six children with three partners and more than 100 additional children through sperm donation. He attributed the second figure to the clinic. The Le Point interview

In his September 2025 conversation with Lex Fridman, Durov was clearer about the uncertainty: he did not know the exact number of his biological children. Even the seemingly precise figure of 106 is therefore uncertain. Six plus more than 100 is not an exact, verified total. Podcast transcript: children

These figures describe biological parentage, not necessarily everyday fatherhood. In the podcast, Durov mentioned genetically related children he had never seen. Having more than 100 biological children does not mean bringing up all of them.

Why old donations can still lead to new births

Durov said in 2024 that he had stopped actively donating years earlier, while frozen sperm remained available. Those statements are compatible. Years can pass between providing a sample and using it. A new report about a child or a clinic offer would not automatically establish a new donation.

Cryopreservation means freezing sperm for later treatment. The British fertility regulator HFEA explains that a sample is usually divided into several containers, so it does not all need to be thawed at once. Material from one donation can therefore be available for different treatments. HFEA on freezing sperm

In this case, donation appointments, treatments and births are three different counts. The reported number of children cannot tell us exactly how many samples Durov provided or predict how many more children might be born.

The inheritance promise he announced in 2025

The Le Point interview was published on 18 June 2025. Durov described a will intended to treat all his children equally. He said they should gain access to his wealth only 30 years after that interview. Durov's statements about his will

That means 30 years from the conversation, not each child's 30th birthday. This remains a public announcement: the interview provides neither the full will nor an explanation of how individual claims would eventually be proved and handled across countries.

Speaking to Lex Fridman, Durov made the plan conditional on people proving their genetic relationship with him. He said he wanted them to share in his estate after his death. His statements do not provide a dependable payout figure for any individual child. Durov on DNA evidence and inheritance

His explanation for the long wait is personal. He wants the children to become independent and believes that receiving wealth too early could weaken their motivation to build something of their own. That explains his plan; it is not a general statement of what is best for children. Durov on wealth and independence

Why a fixed inheritance cannot be calculated

Dividing a fortune estimated in billions by the number of children may be tempting, but it would be misleading. Durov told Le Point that reports of his wealth largely reflected Telegram's theoretical valuation, rather than money simply sitting in a bank account. Durov on how his wealth is valued

Neither the eventual number of possible descendants nor the conditions of the will are clear. There is no credible basis for calculating a sum per child. Families could not rely on the promise as a secure financial foundation.

What the IVF offer with his sperm involves

A specific clinic offer is also part of the story. Moscow's AltraVita advertises free IVF using Durov's sperm on its website. It says he will fund the treatments and that places are limited. The page specifies a maximum age of 37 and medical suitability assessed by a doctor. AltraVita's offer page

The website establishes that the clinic advertises this programme. It does not independently confirm how many women have been treated, how many children have been born or how an individual treatment is funded. Nor does it guarantee acceptance to every interested woman.

The website's general success figures are not results specifically for Durov's programme. It offers no proof that 100 children have already been born through this offer. The earlier number attributed to his donations and the later advertised treatment must be considered separately.

The article on in vitro fertilisation explains the medical process. In Durov's story, the noteworthy change is from a previously anonymous donation to an offer advertised under his name. A donor's public identity becomes central to a medical choice.

Why sperm donation and IVF are not the same

Some headlines can make the process sound like simply choosing a donor. AltraVita's offer specifically concerns IVF treatment. Donation supplies genetic material; IVF is a medical procedure in which eggs are fertilised outside the body.

The process generally involves hormonal stimulation, egg retrieval, fertilisation in a laboratory and transfer of an embryo into the uterus. The exact course depends on the individual's situation. Treatment does not automatically result in a pregnancy or birth. HFEA on the IVF process

Understanding the offer therefore requires distinguishing a publicly known donor from a personal medical decision. A promise to cover costs does not remove the physical demands of treatment or the need to consider one's own chances and wishes.

How sperm donation became a celebrity offer

With many donations, the starting questions concern the donor's health, characteristics and motivation. Here, a globally known name comes first. That changes how people perceive the option: a medical possibility also becomes a story about wealth, success and the supposed prospect of an exceptional future.

In December 2025, The Wall Street Journal described the deliberate promotion of this connection. Its reporting included the clinic's advertising at events and on social media, and a website displaying Durov's image and the Telegram logo. The Wall Street Journal report

That shift matters. An act Durov describes as initially helping a friend is now promoted using his fame. Readers should distinguish his personal motivation, the clinic's commercial message and the interests of children who may be born later.

Are intelligence and success inherited from a donor?

The success of a technology entrepreneur can invite an appealing assumption: perhaps his child would have especially good prospects. Science does not support such a promise. Intelligence is a complex trait shaped by many genes and environmental factors, including education, nutrition and conditions while growing up. MedlinePlus Genetics on intelligence and heredity

A famous biography is neither a medical quality certificate nor a blueprint for a child's personality. Business success also involves decisions, opportunities and social circumstances that cannot be passed on through a donation. Two children with the same biological father can develop very differently.

This distinction is particularly relevant because Durov's image drives so much of the attention. A child would have a genetic connection to him, without any obligation to resemble him, follow his career or become exceptionally successful. Keeping that future open matters more to families than famous parentage.

Why the case attracted so much attention

Durov's case combines several compelling stories: a prominent technology entrepreneur, a striking number of children, a potentially large inheritance and a fertility clinic promoting his name. Each could make news on its own. Together, they explain the continuing interest.

Towards the end of 2025, he added a small but revealing detail by publishing a sketch of a logo for his donation programme on Telegram. Durov himself returned to the subject and gave it a recognisable brand identity. Durov's post with the logo sketch

Years later, a child could encounter interviews, headlines and expectations created long before they began asking about their own origins. This distance between the donor's self-directed public story and the children's privacy makes the case particularly significant.

The DNA plan and finding half-siblings

In his 2024 post, Durov said he wanted to make his DNA accessible so that his biological children could find each other more easily. The linked sources do not establish whether usable genetic data or a protected contact process has since become available. Durov's announcement about DNA

Even a genetic match answers only part of the question. It can suggest a biological relationship, but it cannot determine whether contact is wanted or how the families wish to respond. That remains true even when the donor seeks publicity himself.

The British regulator HFEA notes that home DNA tests can lead to unexpected discoveries through relatives as well. It also stresses that donor-conceived people may decide for themselves whether to learn more about their origins or seek contact. HFEA on DNA testing and origins

For Durov's case, a public DNA proposal would not replace protected access to information and voluntary decisions by those involved. The article on home DNA tests and tracing biological origins discusses the possibilities and limitations further.

There are also two different uses of DNA in the story. His 2024 proposal concerns finding biological relatives; his later inheritance statements concern proving parentage. A system for contacting half-siblings would not automatically provide an established procedure for handling an estate.

What more than 100 biological children could mean for one another

If Durov's account is accurate, a large group would share the same biological father. Some might be curious about each other. Others might feel clear about their own family story and want no further contact. Both responses are understandable. Shared DNA does not automatically create closeness or a common understanding of family.

The reference to twelve countries raises practical questions too. Which languages do the children speak? Where are records held, and how could information be kept up to date over time? Such a search could involve the donor, half-siblings abroad and families with very different expectations.

Knowing the donor's public identity would not be enough. A helpful process would verify information, protect privacy and allow contact only with consent. The reviewed sources do not establish whether such a process exists for Durov's donations. This unresolved issue is more relevant to the children's future everyday lives than many wealth headlines.

What his public statements leave unanswered

Fame makes a donor recognisable, but does not make the donation process transparent. Important questions sit behind Durov's broad announcements:

• How were the reported births documented, and how up to date is the count?
• What information did families receive about the donor and possible half-siblings?
• How could new medical information reach all the families involved later?
• How could children prove their parentage and request information without publicly exposing their identities?

These details are necessary to understand the families' circumstances. The interviews and offer page answer only some of them. The gap between public visibility and private records is central to this case.

What families can take from the case

A famous name says little about the quality of a donation arrangement. If you are considering sperm donation, verifiable identity records and medical screening, clear information about family numbers and a dependable route to future information matter more than a donor's image.

It also helps to consider the child's perspective from the beginning. A child should not have to reconstruct their conception story from headlines. The article How do I explain sperm donation to my child? describes how to discuss it in an age-appropriate way.

Durov's statements have brought sperm donation considerable attention. For families, the personal priorities are reliable information about their origins and the freedom to decide what place this story should have in their own lives.