Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40003521›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of environmental research and public health2025

20 Years Since the Enactment of Italian Law No. 40/2004 on Medically Assisted Procreation: How It Has Changed and How It Could Change.

Gianluca Montanari Vergallo, Susanna Marinelli, Gabriele Napoletano, Lina De Paola, Michele Treglia, Simona Zaami, Paola Frati

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Gianluca Montanari VergalloDepartment of Anatomical, Histological, Forensic and Orthopedic Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-4961-6223
Susanna MarinelliSchool of Law, Polytechnic University of Marche, 60121 Ancona, Italy.ORCID 0009-0009-5135-8196
Gabriele NapoletanoDepartment of Anatomical, Histological, Forensic and Orthopedic Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-5248-6896
Lina De PaolaDepartment of Anatomical, Histological, Forensic and Orthopedic Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0009-0001-4631-1061
Michele TregliaDepartment of Biomedicine and Prevention, Section of Legal Medicine, Social Safety and Forensic Toxicology, University of Rome Tor Vergata, 00133 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9434-2604
Simona ZaamiDepartment of Anatomical, Histological, Forensic and Orthopedic Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-5741-7139
Paola FratiDepartment of Anatomical, Histological, Forensic and Orthopedic Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-0358-7965

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The article examines the changes to Italian legislation on assisted reproductive technology (ART) resulting from rulings by Italian courts, highlighting unresolved ethical-legal issues and potential future regulatory approaches consistent with these decisions. Additionally, it addresses the amendment defining surrogacy as "universal crime", effective as of 18 November 2024. Through an analysis of decisions by the Constitutional Court and the Court of Cassation, it emerges that Law No. 40/2004 has been deemed unconstitutional in relation to the following: heterologous fertilization, the number of embryos that can be created, cryopreservation, the implantation of only healthy embryos, and access to ART for fertile couples. Controversial aspects include the fate of surplus embryos, access to ART for single individuals, and the recognition of parenthood for same-sex couples. The "universal crime" classification of surrogacy raises the possibility of legal consequences for individuals engaging in surrogacy abroad, even where it is lawful. Courts are unlikely to legislate on the allocation of surplus embryos without parliamentary intervention or to allow single individuals access to ART, given the perceived inconsistency with the child's best interests. However, case-by-case evaluations are essential for recognizing non-biological or non-genetic parents in same-sex relationships and for assessing the effectiveness of the universal crime approach in safeguarding rights and public health.

Indexed as

Reproductive Techniques, AssistedFemaleGestational CarriersHumansItalycryopreservationembryo protectionmedically assisted procreationsame-sex parentingsupernumerary embryossurrogacyuniversal crime

Identifiers

PMID40003521
PMCPMC11855168

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.