Surrogacy Insights
Present Day Politics in Italy
Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni advocated for Parliament to enact a stricter surrogacy ban. The alignment of these proposals with the European Court of Human Rights ruling remains uncertain. Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights protects the right to privacy, including the right to create a family. The Court has also ruled that the state must act to enable the development of family ties with children.
In 2016, Italy legalized civil unions between same-sex couples but denied them the ability to adopt each other’s children.
In January 2023, the Minister of the Interior ordered mayors to stop automatically registering births of children conceived abroad via assisted reproductive technologies. The circular also states that the birth certificate of a child of a gay couple who used a surrogate abroad should not be automatically recognized in Italy.
European Court of Human Rights
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has shaped reproductive rights discourse by adjudicating landmark cases like Dickson v The United Kingdom (44362/04) and Evans v United Kingdom. These cases offer insight into Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which protects the right to respect for private and family life.
Case of Evans v. The United Kingdom
In the Evans case, the European Court of Human Rights affirmed that Article 8 includes the right to decide whether to become a parent or not, stressing individual autonomy in reproductive choices. Hence, Italian legislation should acknowledge that all citizens, including gay individuals, have the right to choose parenthood. Moreover, the government must recognize a parent’s familial bond with their children, regardless of their birth method via surrogacy. This acknowledgment is crucial in upholding the rights affirmed by the European Court of Human Rights.
Case of Dickson v. The United Kingdom
The Dickson case addresses restrictions on procreation, This case involved the issue of a request for artificial insemination for incarcerated individuals. It highlights barriers to reproductive rights and stresses the importance of preventing excessive government regulation. Laws discriminating against groups such as gay individuals in parenthood access could be legally challenged. The Italian government must enact laws supporting reproductive rights for all citizens regardless of sexual orientation or face an appeal to the European Court of Human Rights.
The ECtHR’s approach recognizes the intricate ethical and legal considerations surrounding assisted reproductive technologies (ART), such as in vitro fertilization (IVF). While each country has the prerogative to regulate ART, any measures infringing on individuals’ rights to family life and reproductive autonomy may raise concerns under Article 8.
Balance
The ECtHR plays a vital role in safeguarding fundamental human rights amidst changing societal norms and technological advancements, particularly in the realm of reproductive rights. The balance between state interests and individual liberties is highlighted in this context. With ongoing developments in Italy, observing the speed at which contentious legislation is brought before the ECtHR for resolution will be intriguing.
Future Legal Developments
Surrogacy is legal in the USA. While an American parentage order and birth certificate may be perfectly valid in the United States, Italy can refuse to recognize those documents, deny legal status to one parent, and even investigate or prosecute the intended parents. Understanding why requires a look at international law, Italian domestic law, and recent European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) decisions.
1. No Treaty Requires Italy to Recognize U.S. Surrogacy Judgments
A core misconception is that countries must honor each other’s birth certificates or court orders. In reality, there is no treaty, neither bilateral nor multilateral, that requires Italy to recognize a U.S. surrogacy judgment or parentage order. There is also no Hague Convention on surrogacy or assisted reproduction.
As a result:
A U.S. pre-birth or post-birth parentage order binds U.S. authorities
It does not bind Italy
Italy is free to accept or reject it based on its own public policy
This is the legal foundation for the conflict.
2. Italy’s Domestic Law Criminalizes Surrogacy within and outside its Borders
Italy’s Law 40/2004 already criminalized surrogacy within Italy. In 2024, Italy went further: it extended criminal liability to Italians who engage in surrogacy anywhere in the world, even where it is fully legal.
Penalties include:
3 months to 2 years in prison
Fines from €600,000 to €1 million
This “universal crime” model means Italian citizens can be prosecuted even if:
The surrogacy took place in a U.S. state where it is fully legal
A U.S. court issued a binding parentage order
a valid U.S. birth certificate lists the intended parents
Italy treats the surrogacy arrangement itself as a criminal act, not the child.
3. Why Italy Can Reject a U.S. Birth Certificate or Court Order
Under principles of private international law, countries generally recognize each other’s judgments unless recognition would violate their “public policy” (ordre public).
Italy views surrogacy as:
exploitative
contrary to human dignity
socially harmful
illegal and punishable
Therefore, Italy can legally refuse to transcribe:
A U.S. birth certificate listing the intended parents
A U.S. court order declaring them legal parents
Any other document flowing from a surrogacy agreement
This remains true even when both intended parents are genetic parents.
In Italian law, motherhood is determined strictly by gestation, not genetics (mater semper certa est). Thus, the birth mother (the surrogate) is always the legal mother in Italy.
4. Italy Must Recognize the Biological Father: Because of ECtHR, Not Because of the U.S.
The landmark ECtHR case C. v. Italy (2023) clarified a crucial point:
- Italy MUST recognize the biological father.
- But NOT the intended mother,
to protect the child’s right to identity and family life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The Court held:
Refusing to recognize the genetic father violates the child’s rights
Italy must provide a fast, effective way to secure legal parentage
But Italy may require the intended (non-gestational) mother to adopt
Italy is NOT required to recognize the intended mother automatically
Italy may still criminalize the surrogacy arrangement
This means Italian authorities must recognize the father solely because European human-rights law compels them and not because they accept the U.S. surrogacy order.
5. The Paradox: A Father Can Be Recognized Yet Still Criminally Liable
This is the most troubling contradiction for families.
In Italy today:
✔ The biological father must be recognized
✘ The intended mother must adopt
BUT, both intended parents may remain exposed to prosecution
Parentage recognition protects the child, not the parents. Criminal liability attaches to the adults’ actions, not the child’s status.
Thus, the father could:
be recognized as the legal parent
AND still face criminal penalties for participating in surrogacy abroad
This is why many Italian parents are afraid to return home after international surrogacy.
6. What If the Child Is Genetically Related to Both Parents?
Even in this scenario:
Italy still treats the surrogate as the legal mother
Only the biological father is recognized automatically (due to ECtHR)
The intended mother must be provided with a pathway to parenthood, such as adoption.
Italy can still consider both intended parents criminal offenders
Unfortunately, genetics does not overcome the Italian rule that the woman who gives birth is the mother.
7. Why Italy’s Approach Matters for International Surrogacy
Italy is now one of the most restrictive jurisdictions in the world regarding surrogacy. It is even more restrictive than when France resisted recognition a decade ago.
When combined with UN reports that call for a global ban on surrogacy as inherently exploitative, Europe is entering a new phase where:
domestic bans
cross-border criminalization
refusal to recognize foreign judgments
are increasingly common.
Meanwhile, the ECtHR is emerging as a counterbalance, protecting the rights of children, but regretfully, not validating surrogacy itself.
Conclusion
Surrogacy in Italy exposes deep contradictions. While the United States provides full legal parentage recognition, Italy refuses to accept these judgments on public-policy grounds and now criminalizes the practice entirely, even when carried out abroad. The ECtHR’s decision in C. v. Italy forces Italy to recognize the biological father, but stops far short of requiring recognition of the intended mother or approval of surrogacy itself.
The result is a legal paradox for Italian families: their child’s rights to identity and legal parentage must be protected, but the parents themselves may face prosecution simply for having created that child through surrogacy.
Italy can do better than this; Italians are better than this.