Protection of the rights of children born using reproductive technologies

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18370/2309-4117.2025.79.77-91

Keywords:

a child born using reproductive technologies, reproductive rights, parenthood, legal regulation, medical law, legal status of the child, identity, posthumous reproduction, legal awareness of medical professionals

Abstract

Background. The use of assisted reproductive technologies (ART) gives rise to additional problems of a social, ethical and legal nature, in particular, an important unresolved issue is the status of children born using these technologies. Medical law in Ukraine has numerous gaps in legal regulation, and the sphere of assisted reproduction is no exception, which affects the issue of ensuring the best interests of the child.
Objective of the study: to carry out an intercomplementary analysis of the problem of protecting the rights of children born using reproductive technologies in the context of highlighting aspects of their social, ethical, medical and legal status.
Materials and methods. The research methodology includes a complex of philosophical (dialectical; ethical-normative; phenomenological) and special scientific (statistical, comparative-legal, dogmatic) methods.
Results. The authors harmonized the terms and concepts of the issue, analyzed the legal regulation of ART and studied individual aspects of the social and legal status of children born using this method. The article also examines the problems of information accessibility of their genetic information and paternity data, and presents the legal and psychosocial aspects of the right to identity of such a group of children. The problem of legal regulation of the posthumous use of reproductive cells has been studied in detail precisely in the context of ensuring the best interests of the child and balancing these interests with the reproductive rights of parents. The authors separately emphasize the importance of legal awareness of medical professionals, compliance between them and recipients and donors, cooperation between doctors and lawyers in various forms, which will contribute to the creation of the necessary conditions for general well-being, the implementation of reproductive rights, psychosocial comfort and legal protection of children born using ART.
Conclusions. Based on the results of the analysis of the declared problem, the need for child-centeredness, non-discrimination in any form and the need for further scientific research into the feasibility of updating the current legislation by adopting a profile Law on ART, changing the requirements for donors of reproductive cells, guaranteeing the right to identity by prohibiting anonymous donation and introducing quotas on the number of families for using gametes from one donor, balanced regulation of posthumous reproduction, allowing the use of gametes of military personnel as donors and making changes to family and civil legislation regarding the regulation of the status of children born using ART, parents and donors.

Author Biographies

T.Z. Harasymiv, Lviv Polytechnic National University, Lviv

doctor of juridical sciences, professor, Department of International and Criminal Law of the Educational and Scientific Institute of Law, Psychology and Innovative Education

V.Z. Chornopyska, Lviv Polytechnic National University, Lviv

doctor of juridical sciences, associate professor, Department of Civil Law and Process of the Educational and Scientific Institute of Law, Psychology and Innovative Education

M.M. Ternushchak, Uzhgorod National University, Uzhgorod

doctor of juridical sciences, associate professor, professor, Department of Administrative, Financial and Information Law

O.S. Kotuha, Lviv University of Trade and Economics, Lviv

PhD, professor of the Department of Civil and Business, Law and Procedure, Dean of the Faculty of Law

O.I. Hutsuliak, Vasyl’ Stus Donetsk National University, Vinnytsia

PhD, associate professor, Department of Constitutional, International and Criminal Law

References

  1. Pokalchuk OY. Assisted Reproductive Technologies as a Legal Category. Theory and Practice of Intellectual Property, 2020;(6):156–163. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33731/62020.234068
  2. Barabash OO. The Right to Medical Care and Health Protection in the Sphere of Reproductive Technologies: Artificial Intelligence and Artificial Reproduction. Analytical and Comparative Jurisprudence, 2025;1(3):921–927. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24144/2788-6018.2025.01.154
  3. Njagi P, Groot W, Arsenijevic J, et al. Financial Costs of Assisted Reproductive Technology for Patients in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review. Human Reproduction Open. 2023; 2023(2):hoad007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/hropen/hoad007
  4. Robertson JA. Children of Choice: Freedom and the New Reproductive Technologies. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2021. 291 p.
  5. Barnes T, Abakah-Nkrumah G, Anim-Boamah OO, Sefogah PE. Legal and ethical challenges in assisted reproductive technology practice in Ghana. Ghana Medical Journal, 2024; 58(1): 78–85. DOI: 10.4314/gmj.v58i1.11
  6. Zharovska IM, Matyashovska RY. Global Challenges in Law (On the Example of the Status of Preschool Children): Collective Monograph. Kyiv: Vydavnytstvo Lyudmyla, 2020. 140 p.
  7. Danylenko PO. Legal analysis of postmortem reproduction in the aspect of servicemen’s rights. Scientific Bulletin of Uzhhorod National University. Series: Law, 2025; 88(1): 141–5. DOI: 10.24144/2307-3322.2025.88.1.19
  8. Aftanasiv VM, Pankevych OZ, Barabash OO. Informed consent of the donor as a guarantee of constitutional rights in the process of postmortem reproduction. Scientific Bulletin of Uzhhorod National University. Series: Law. 2025;88(4):232–9. DOI: 10.24144/2307-3322.2025.88.4.34
  9. Checherskyi VI. Postmortem reproductiС–on as a guarantee of the realization of the right to reproduction for servicemen and other persons. Analytical and Comparative Jurisprudence, 2024;1:162–6. DOI: 10.24144/2788-6018.2024.01.27
  10. Zhang S, Luo Q, Meng R, et al. Long-term health risk of offspring born from assisted reproductive technologies. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics. 2024;41(3):527–50. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-023-02988-5
  11. Ono M, Kuji N, Ueno K, et al. The Long-Term Outcome of Children Conceived Through Assisted Reproductive Technology. Reprod. Sci. 2024;31:583–90. DOI: 10.1007/s43032-023-01339-0.
  12. Carneiro FAT, Leong V, Nóbrega S, et al. Are the children alright? A systematic review of psychological adjustment of children conceived by assisted reproductive technologies. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2024;33:2527–46. DOI: 10.1007/s00787-022-02129-w.
  13. Balynskaya OM, Teremetskyi VI, Zharovskaya I et al. The patient’s right to confidentiality in the field of health care. Georgian Medical News. 2021;12 (321):147–53.
  14. Graham ME, Jelin A, Hoon AHJ, et al. Assisted reproductive technology: Short- and long-term outcomes. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2023;65(1):38–49. DOI: 10.1111/dmcn.15332.
  15. Medenica S, Zivanovic D, Batkoska L, et al. The future is coming: artificial intelligence in the treatment of infertility could improve assisted reproduction outcomes – the value of regulatory frameworks. Diagnostics. 2022;12(12):2979. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12122979.
  16. Tenchov R, Zhou QA. Assisted Reproductive Technology: A Ray of Hope for Infertility. ACS Omega. 2025 May 23;10(22):22347–65. DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.5c01643.
  17. Zhing X. Recent Advances in Assisted Reproductive Technologies: Innovations, Efficacy, and Future Directions. Journal of Basic and Clinical Reproductive Sciences. 2024;13(3): DOI: JBCRS-24-143318.
  18. Hanassab S, Abbara A, Yeung AC, et al. The prospect of artificial intelligence to personalize assisted reproductive technology. npj Digital Medicine. 2024;7:55. DOI: 10.1038/s41746-024-01006-x.
  19. Adamson GD, Creighton P, de Mouzon J, et al. How many infants have been born with the help of assisted reproductive technology? Fertility and Sterility. 2025. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2025.02.009.
  20. Kashyap S, Tripathi P. Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act 2021: Critique and Contestations. Asian Bioeth Rev. 2023; 11;16(2):149–64. DOI: 10.1007/s41649-023-00253-6.
  21. Macha P, Reddy R, Kalbande A, Kumar V. Embryologists’ perspective on medical, legal, and ethical frameworks in assisted reproductive technologies in India: A narrative review. Asian Pacific Journal of Reproduction. 2025;14(2):49–55. DOI: 10.4103/apjr.apjr_185_24.
  22. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act [Internet]. Legislation.gov.uk, 2008. Available from: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2008/22/contents.
  23. Assisted Reproductive Treatment. Act № – 76/2008 [Internet]. Victorian Legislstion, 2008. Available from: https://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-force/acts/assisted-reproductive-treatment-act-2008/024.
  24. Western Australia. Human Reproductive Technology Act [Internet]. The Government of Western Australia, 1991. Available from: https://www.legislation.wa.gov.au/legislation/statutes. nsf/main_mrtitle_435_homepage.html.
  25. Gesamte Rechtsvorschrift fГјr Fortpflanzungsmedizingesetz (Reproductive Medicine Act) [Internet]. Cornel Law School, 1992. Available from: https://www.law.cornell.edu/gender-justice/resource/gesamte_ rechtsvorschrift_f%C3%BCr_fortpflanzungsmedizingesetz_%28reproductive_medicine_act%29.
  26. Order of the Ministry of Health of Ukraine No. 787 В«On Approval of the Procedure for the Use of Assisted Reproductive Technologies in UkraineВ» as revised on 30.12.2024 [Internet]. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 2024. Available from: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/z1697-13#Text.
  27. Fundamentals of the Legislation of Ukraine on Health Care. No. 2801-XII as revised on 18.06.2025. [Internet]. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 2025. Available from: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2801-12#Text.
  28. Health and Safety Code – HSC, ARTICLE 2.5. Reproductive Privacy Act [Internet]. California. Legislative information, 2023. Available from: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_ displayText.xhtml?lawCode=HSC&division=106.&title=&part =2.&chapter=2.&article=2.5. .
  29. Surrogacy Agreements Law (Approval of Agreement and Status of the Newborn), 1996 Internet]. Nevo, 2023. Available from: https://www.nevo.co.il/law_html/law00/71740.htm.
  30. Gesetz zum Schutz von Embryonen (Embryonenschutzgesetz) [Internet] Bundesministerium der Justiz und für Verbraucherschutz, 1990. Available from: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/eschg/BJNR027460990.html.
  31. Norme in materia di procreazione medicalmente assistita [Internet] Normattiva La Portale Della Legge Vigente, 2024. Available from: https://www.normattiva.it/uri-res/N2Ls?urn:nir:stato:decreto.presidente.della. repubblica:2004;40~art12!vig=.
  32. Lov om humanmedisinsk bruk av bioteknologi m.m. (bioteknologiloven) [Internet]. Lovdata, 2021. Available from: https://lovdata.no/dokument/NL/lov/2003-12-05-100.
  33. Masum A, Ahmad N, Md. Dah NH. Legitimacy of children born by artificial insemination in Malaysia: A legal analysis of Section 112 of the Evidence Act 1950. Legal Network Series. 2021;1:1–18.
  34. Family Code of Ukraine. Law of Ukraine No. 2947-III as revised on 14.05.2025 [Internet]. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 2025. Available from: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2947-14#Text.
  35. Assisted Human Reproduction Act [Internet]. Justice Laws Website, 2004. Available from: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/A-13.4/.
  36. The Genetic Integrity Act. Swedish Code of Statutes [Internet]. Ministry/Agency: Ministry of Health and Social Affairs, 2006. Available from: https://www.icj.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Sweden-Genetic-Integrity-Act-2006-eng.pdf.
  37. Wet donorgegevens kunstmatige bevruchting [Internet]. Logo Overheid.nl, 2025. Available from: https://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0013642/2020-03-19.
  38. Huang W. Donor anonymity and child’s self-identity for assisted reproductive technology. Peking University Law Journal. 2024;12(1):119–33. DOI: 10.1080/20517483.2024.2400793
  39. European Court of Human Rights, case “Miculic v. Croatia”, application no 53176/99 [Internet]. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 2002. Available from: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/980_049#Text.
  40. European Court of Human Rights, case “Odièvre v. France”, application no 42326/98 [Internet]. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 2003 Available from: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-60935%22]}.
  41. Areias J, Gato J, Moura-Ramos M. Motivations and Attitudes of Men Towards Sperm Donation: Whom to Donate and Why? Sex Res Social Policy. 2022;19(1):147–58. DOI: 10.1007/s13178-020-00531-0.
  42. Bujan L, Nouri N, Papaxanthos-Roche A, et al. Motivations and personality characteristics of candidate sperm and oocyte donors according to parenthood status: a national study from the French CECOS network. Hum Reprod Open. 2022 Oct 19;2022(4):hoac042. DOI: 10.1093/hropen/hoac042.
  43. Platts S, Bracewell-Milnes T, Saso S, et al. Investigating attitudes towards oocyte donation amongst potential donors and the general population: a systematic review. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2021 Jul;24(3):169–81. DOI: 10.1080/14647273.2019.1602736.
  44. Skoog Svanberg A, Sydsjö G, Lampic C. Psychosocial aspects of identity-release gamete donation – perspectives of donors, recipients, and offspring. Upsala Journal of Medical Sciences, 2019; 125 (2):175–82. DOI: 10.1080/03009734.2019.1696431.
  45. Duff MA, Goedeke S. Parents’ disclosure to their donor-conceived children in the last 10 years and factors affecting disclosure: a narrative review. Hum Reprod Update. 2024 Jul 1;30(4):488–527. DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmae010.
  46. Ishii T, de Miguel Beriain I. Shifting to a model of donor conception that entails a communication agreement among the parents, donor, and offspring. BMC Med Ethics. 2022 Mar 4;23(1):18. DOI: 10.1186/s12910-022-00756-1.
  47. Rocha DO, Melamed RMM, de Almeida Ferreira Braga DP, et al. The Child’s Right to Know Versus the Parents’ Right Not to Tell: The Attitudes of Couples Undergoing Fertility Treatments Towards Identity-Release Gamete Donation. J Reprod Infertil. 2023 Jul-Sep;24(3):198–205. DOI: 10.18502/jri.v24i3.13276.
  48. Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Informing offspring of their conception by gamete or embryo donation: an Ethics Committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2018 Apr;109(4):601–5. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.01.001.
  49. Dutch court orders sperm donor to stop after 550 children [Internet]. The Guardian. 2023 Apr 28. Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/apr/28/dutch-court-orders-sperm-donor-to-stop-after-550-children.
  50. European regulation needed to prevent the birth of children with inherited cancer-causing genetic mutation after sperm donation [Internet]. EurekAlert! 2025 Available from: https://www. eurekalert.org/news-releases/1084712.
  51. Horton R, Bell B, Fenwick A, Lucassen AM. Is it acceptable to contact an anonymous egg donor to facilitate diagnostic genetic testing for the donor-conceived child? J Med Ethics. 2019 Jun;45(6):357–60. DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2018-105322.
  52. Schneider K, Zelley K, Nichols KE, et al. Li-Fraumeni Syndrome. 1999 Jan 19. In: Adam MP, Feldman J, Mirzaa GM, Pagon RA, Wallace SE, Amemiya A. Seattle (WA): University of Washington, Seattle; 1993–2025.
  53. European regulation needed to prevent the birth of children with inherited cancer-causing genetic mutation after sperm donation. Talk no. C13.06: Multiple European children born with cancer predisposition following recurrent sperm donation from a mosaic TP53 carrier. May 24, 2025. [Internet]. The European Society of Human Genetics. 2025 Press Releases. Available from: https://www.eshg.org/news-home/for-media/2025-press-releases.
  54. Kiermeier S, Schott S, Nees J, et al. Health-related quality of life and fear of progression in individuals with Li-Fraumeni syndrome. J Genet Couns. 2025 Feb;34(1):e1859. DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1859.
  55. Scheib JE, McCormick E, Benward J, Ruby A. Finding people like me: contact among young adults who share an open-identity sperm donor. Hum Reprod Open. 2021 Jan 19;2021(1):hoaa069. DOI: 10.1093/hropen/hoaa069.
  56. Redhead CAB, Barker N, Fox M, Frith L. Warnock and its contested legacy in relation to donor conceived families: the case for regulatory reform. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2025 Dec;28(1):2493252. DOI: 10.1080/14647273.2025.2493252.
  57. Law of Ukraine «On Amendments to Certain Laws of Ukraine Regarding Ensuring the Right of Military Personnel and Other Persons to Biological ParenthoodВ» dated 22 November 2023 [Internet]. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 2024. Available from: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/3496-20#n6.
  58. Law of Ukraine «On Amending Paragraph 2 of Section II «Final and Transitional Provisions» of the Law of «On Amendments to Certain Laws of Ukraine Regarding Ensuring the Right of Military Personnel and Other Persons to Biological Parenthood» Concerning the Preservation of the Gene Pool of the Ukrainian People» dated 07 February 2024 [Internet]. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 2024. Available from: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/3573-20#Text.
  59. Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine No. 78, dated 24 January 2025. «On Approval of the Procedure for the Collection, Cryopreservation and Storage of Reproductive Cells of Military Personnel and Other Persons in Case of Loss of Reproductive Function During the Performance of Duties Related to State Defense and Other Responsibilities under the Law» [Internet]. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 2025. Available from: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/78-2025-%D0%BF#Text.
  60. Khodieieva NV. The human right to reproductive reproduction: postmortem use and storage of cryopreserved materials. Visnyk of Kharkiv National University of Internal Affairs. 2025; 108 (1, Part 1): 123–35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32631/v.2025.1.10.
  61. Polyakov A, Rozen G. Exploring the complexities of posthumous reproduction in fertility preservation for oncology patients with poor prognosis. Reprod Fertil. 2023 Nov 1;4(4):e230072. DOI: 10.1530/RAF-23-0072.
  62. Savitsky B. Reasons for opposition to posthumous reproduction and prior consent: attitudes of Jewish men during the ongoing armed conflict. Isr J Health Policy Res. 2025 Jul 21;14(1):45. DOI: 10.1186/s13584-025-00703-6.
  63. Buitrago Ramírez F, Ciurana Misol R, Fernández Alonso MDC, Tizón JL. Miembros del Grupo de Salud Mental. Prevención de los trastornos de la salud mental. Hijos de familias monoparentales [Prevention of mental health disorders in primary care: Children of single-parent families. Pregnancy in adolescence]. Aten Primaria. 2022 Oct;54 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):102445. Spanish. DOI: 10.1016/j.aprim.2022.102445.
  64. Naito T, Tomata Y, Otsuka T, et al. Did Children in Single-Parent Households Have a Higher Probability of Emotional Instability during the COVID-19 Pandemic? A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study in Japan. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Apr 1;19(7):4239. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19074239.
  65. Herke M, Knöchelmann A, Richter M. Health and Well-Being of Adolescents in Different Family Structures in Germany and the Importance of Family Climate. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Sep 5;17(18):6470. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17186470.

Downloads

Published

2025-09-18

How to Cite

Harasymiv, T., Chornopyska, V., Ternushchak, M., Kotuha, O., & Hutsuliak, O. (2025). Protection of the rights of children born using reproductive technologies. REPRODUCTIVE ENDOCRINOLOGY, (79), 77–91. https://doi.org/10.18370/2309-4117.2025.79.77-91

Issue

No. 79 (2025)

Section

Legal aspects of reproductive health

License

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

    1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

    1. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.