ReviewFrontiers in reproductive health2026
Posthumous assisted reproduction and post-mortem paternity.
Review in Frontiers in reproductive health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ethical analysis of European Court of Human Rights fertility preservation cases from 2000 to 2025.Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2026Article
- Informed consent in medically assisted procreation in Italy: medico-legal and ethical challenges shaping physician responsibility.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The advancement of artificial reproductive technologies (ART) has outpaced many existing legal and ethical frameworks, challenging foundational notions of parenthood, consent, and the temporality of reproductive decisions. Among the most complex developments is posthumous assisted reproduction. While medically feasible, this practice raises profound legal and ethical questions, especially regarding the nature and validity of consent to parenthood to a child who will be born to a deceased father. Aim: This article provides a comparative analysis of legislation and regulatory frameworks governing posthumous reproduction via embryo transfer (a topic less investigated compared to gamete retrieval) across selected European countries to contextualize this practice. Materials and methods: The study adopts a comparative methodology, analyzing laws, regulatory guidelines from several European countries: Belgium, France, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain, the Netherlands, United Kingdom. Sources include legal databases, national ART authority publications, and academic articles. Results: The analysis reveals a fragmented European landscape. France maintains a categorical prohibition on posthumous reproduction, while all other countries investigated permit it under different degrees of procedural and temporal safeguards, emphasizing explicit, written, and pre-mortem consent. Conclusions: Overall, posthumous reproduction is framed as a continuation of a parental project, but consent models and temporal limits vary, ranging from specific post-mortem authorization to reliance on prior ART consent alone. Most countries impose waiting periods of six to twelve months and temporal limits of one to five years, while the Netherlands applies the general ART age limit of forty-nine years, and Italy stands out for the absence of any time restriction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.