Volume 11 - Issue 53
/ May 2022
101
https:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322 - 6307
DOI: https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2022.53.05.10
How to Cite:
Cherneha, V., Hrytsai, I., Tarasevych, T., Savchenko, V., & Krushelnytska, H. (2022). Rights of a child born through the use of
assisted reproductive technologies in the EU countries and Ukraine. Amazonia Investiga, 11(53), 101-110.
https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2022.53.05.10
Rights of a child born through the use of assisted reproductive
technologies in the EU countries and Ukraine
Права дитини, народженої за допомогою репродуктивних технологій в країнах
Європейського Союзу та Україні
Received: February 3, 2022 Accepted: March 30, 2022
Written by:
Vitalii Cherneha44
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9118-6562
Iryna Hrytsai45
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5467-839X
Tetiana Tarasevych46
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3860-9909
Viktor Savchenko47
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7104-3559
Hanna Krushelnytska48
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9934-6973
Abstract
This article aims to identify the features of the
European Union and Ukraine legislation on the
rights of children born through reproductive
technologies and the practice of its application.
To achieve this goal, first of all, an analysis of an
array of sources in the field of the rights of
children born with the help of reproductive
technologies was carried out. The paper
compares the legislation and practice of the
European Union and Ukraine regarding the rights
of children born with the use of reproductive
technologies, which was achieved through
comparative law. The historical-legal method has
made it possible to outline the changes that have
taken place in the approaches to the rights of
children born with the help of reproductive
technologies in countries whose legislation and
practice have been specially studied. The
synthesis method was applied, which helped to
form a comprehensive vision of the rights of
children born with the help of reproductive
technologies in the European Union and Ukraine
countries. The direction of research on ensuring
44
PhD in Law, Associate Professor at the Department of Business Law and Corporate Law, Educational and Scientific Institute
"Institute of law", State Higher Educational Institution Kyiv National Economic University named after Vadym Hetman, Kyiv,
Ukraine.
45
Doctor of Law, Professor General Legal Disciplines Department, Educational and Scientific Institute of Law and Innovative
Education, Dnipropetrovsk State University of Internal Affairs, Dnipro, Ukraine.
46
PhD in Law, Associate Professor at the Department of Public Law Disciplines, Vinnytsia Mykhailo Kotsiubynskyi State
Pedagogical University, Vinnytsia, Ukraine.
47
PhD in Law, Associate Professor at the Civil Law Department, V. N. Karazin National University, Kharkiv, Ukraine.
48
PhD in Law, Senior Lecturer at the Department of Civil Law Disciplines, National Academy of Internal Affairs, Kyiv, Ukraine.
102
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
and guaranteeing the right to life of children born
with the help of reproductive technologies is
promising.
Keywords: adoption, assisted reproduction,
assisted reproductive technologies, natural
motherhood, rights of the child, right to life,
surrogacy, freedom of will.
Introduction
The ways of giving birth to a child resorting to
science and technology have expanded greatly in
the 21st century. The use of assisted reproductive
technologies encompasses important ethical,
social, socio-economic, legal and even religious
aspects. The use of reproductive technologies has
raised many issues related to human rights and
freedoms, dominated by the disputes over the
parentage of those children. The problems of
child and organ trafficking, securing the right to
know parents and the story of origin are
particularly acute.
EU and Ukrainian legislation provides for
assisted reproductive technologies ranging from
in vitro fertilization (IVF) to surrogacy (Medical
Center “Leleka”, n.d.). As a result, more than
200,000 children conceived by artificial
insemination are born each year. Moreover, in
some EU countries (Denmark) citizens have the
right to have a child through the use of IVF free
of charge.
The national and European legislation addresses
the issue of assisted reproduction mainly from
the parentage perspective. Basay (2014) defines
surrogacy as the implantation of an embryo
belonging to a spouse and created through in
vitro fertilization for the purpose of childbearing
and childbirth, carried out by mutual agreement
of persons entitled to use this method of assisted
reproductive technologies with the subsequent
child transfer to the appropriate persons. The
features of surrogacy are the following:
− Mutual agreement of persons involved in the
surrogacy program;
− Admitting only those persons to this
program who are entitled to it;
− The fact of conception through IVF followed
by embryo implantation;
− The embryo used to implement this method
of assisted reproductive technologies must
belong to the spouses. The use of the genetic
material of the spouses is one of the main
conditions for surrogacy. There are 3 options
for surrogacy, namely: the use of the wife’s
egg and husband’s sperm; use of the wife’s
egg and donor’s sperm; the use of the
donor’s egg and husband’s sperm.
− The main purpose of surrogacy should be to
bear and give birth to a child.
These methods become especially relevant when
it is impossible in a natural way. As a
consequence, the rate of use of reproductive
technologies has recently increased noticeably,
while complex and sensitive ethical issues
related to the use of such technologies have not
been resolved at the state level. At this stage,
governments focus mainly on the right of adults
to create a family and have children or on
banning all forms of assisted reproduction,
depending on public policy.
The issue of the right of a child born through the
use of assisted reproductive technologies
remains, however, inadequately developed.
Therefore, national law and practice do not
recognize the unborn child as a subject of rights,
treating it as an object of a surrogacy agreement:
an “embryo”. The new-born child still remains
subject to the contract until the parties fulfil their
obligations to transfer the child to the parents.
Hence, the child is objectified as an object of
trade. It is important to emphasize that the ways
in which assisted reproduction is regulated have
significant implications for children’s rights,
which must be taken into account in the
development and application of legislation on the
use of assisted reproductive technologies. This
necessitates a detailed research on relevant
issues.
The expression of the will of persons who have
applied for the use of reproductive technologies
is the main requirement and the initial stage of
their service. The intention of individuals in the
use of reproductive technologies is evidenced by
informed consent. This issue is especially
relevant in wartime if a man has agreed to freeze
his reproductive cells as part of the process of
using reproductive technologies, agreeing to
fertilize a woman. Therefore, whether this
Cherneha, V., Hrytsai, I., Tarasevych, T., Savchenko, V., Krushelnytska, H. / Volume 11 - Issue 53: 101-110 / May, 2022
Volume 11 - Issue 53
/ May 2022
103
https:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
consent will be relevant if the man dies arises.
These and many other issues are highly relevant,
as they directly affect those who use reproductive
technologies and the unborn child's rights.
So, the issue of the development of the rights of
children born through the use of reproductive
technologies is becoming increasingly important
with a view to the European integration of
Ukraine. This problem is especially relevant with
regard to the adaptation of national health care
legislation to European law. These factors
determine the topicality of this research. In
particular, the issue of the child’s right to life,
knowledge of his or her origin and contact with
his or her biological parents is particularly acute.
The aim of this article is to identify features of
the legislation development and security of the
rights of children born through the use of
reproductive technologies in Ukraine and the EU.
This research involved the following objectives:
− determine the place of the rights of children
born through the use of reproductive
technologies in the legal system;
− analyze the state of practical realization of
the rights of children born through the use of
reproductive technologies;
− identify the main gaps and trends in the
development of the rights of children born
through the use of reproductive technologies
in Ukraine and the EU.
Literature Review
Many recent researches in the field of law, social
and medical sciences conducted by the scholars
around the world dealt with the issue of the rights
of people born through the use of assisted
reproductive technologies. This indicates the
growing urgency of this issue on a global scale.
Somerville (2007) emphasizes that the most
basic right of every person is the right to be born
and to know his or her natural origin. The rights
of those children also include the right to know
their biological parents and, if at all possible, to
bring them up. But the same-sex marriages
require changes in legislation that would
enshrine children’s rights to know their
biological origins and families.
Mohr and Koch (2016) reviewed the evolution of
IVF in Denmark. It was found that disputes
between medical authorities, debates on the
range of persons entitled to access reproductive
biomedicine and changes in individual and social
identity through the use of assisted reproductive
technologies accompanied the introduction of
IVF in Denmark. The first child, Troels Renard
Ostberg, born through the use of assisted
reproductive technology, came into the world in
1983. But the rights of the child, including the
right to privacy, were not adequately protected
despite the success of the procedure.
Studying the regulations in the field of assisted
reproductive technologies and (re)definition of
human rights in Poland in 2018, Mishtal (2019)
pointed out that the public debate in Poland has
been dominated by the struggle for reproductive
rights since the political revival of the Catholic
Church in 1989. In 2015, the state adopted the In
Vitro Policy to regulate assisted reproductive
technologies, which became a milestone.
Madeira (2015) studied information consent as a
form of expression of the will of persons who
wish to use reproductive technologies. The
researcher positions that informed consent
should not be a one-time signing of a document
but a process that lasts throughout the treatment
period. Patients are unpredictable, they make
decisions based on a wide range of problems,
both individual and relationship, and sometimes
they are even irrational.
Honkasalo (2018) explored the substantiation of
the demand for sterilization of Finnish
transgender people to maintain reproductive
justice. Finnish citizens are still debating the
withdrawal of the sterilization provision from the
Transgender Act demanding to reform parental
legislation and the legislation on affordable,
accessible and fair reproductive health for
transgender people. So, this author raised the
moral and ethical issues of the rights of children
born to transgender couples.
Haug and Milewski (2019) dealt with the
attitudes towards assisted reproductive
technologies among immigrant and non-
immigrant women in Germany. The author notes
that the social demand for assisted reproductive
technologies is growing in Western countries
because of the low birth rates, high childlessness
rates and the gap between the desired and actual
number of children.
The research by Montanari Vergallo (2019)
considers the surrogacy experience of Italy. The
birth of children who are then raised by parents
who may have no genetic or biological
connection to them became possible due to
surrogacy. The national criminal code of Italy
prohibits medical assistance to reproduction, but
the legislation of this country does not affect the
104
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
parents’ ability to legally register children born
abroad through surrogacy.
Rallo et al. (2021) noted COVID-19 strongly
affected infertile couples. Italy, like most
European countries, has closed most assisted
fertilization centers since the outbreak of the
pandemic. We consider that access to assisted
reproduction methods for sterile and infertile
couples should be part of the right to health, not
the alleged parentage right or a tool to increase
the birth rates, the decline of which was caused,
among other things, by the COVID-19 pandemic.
Methods
This research paper involved modern general
scientific, as well as political and legal research
methods. The comparative law was an important
method to analyze the regulation of assisted
reproductive technologies in Ukraine and the EU
in the 21st century.
The method of systematization was involved in
the research to generalize and classify the
consequences of the use of assisted reproductive
technologies. A systematic review of the
scientific literature was carried out with further
comprehensive analysis of data related to the use
of assisted reproductive technologies.
Ukrainian and European academic and practical
materials on the research subject were reviewed
in this paper. The sample was based on the
resources that provided information to study the
background and history of assisted reproductive
technologies.
The legislation of some EU countries (Great
Britain, Denmark, Germany, Poland, France,
etc.) and Ukraine in this field is analyzed. It
provided for the analysis of international law and
international business practice in this field. The
research procedure provided for determining the
topicality and research prospects of the subject
matter.
The first stage of the study involved a review of
scientific sources for 2014-2021 to analyze the
main aspects and theoretical foundations of
reproductive technologies in the EU and Ukraine.
The next stage involved the selection of practical
materials for research through an integrated
approach to examine the material and to identify
the main problems and prospects of this research.
We further examined the relevant regulations of
Ukraine and the EU to verify the results. The
appropriate practical materials on the research
topic were monitored.
An important objective is examining the issue of
realization of the rights of children born through
the use of assisted reproductive technologies in
the EU countries and Ukraine.
The object of research is social relations that
arise in the course of realization of the rights of
children born through the use of assisted
reproductive technologies in the European Union
and Ukraine.
Results
The review of the studies found that assisted
reproductive technologies are a relatively young
field of research. The use of reproductive
technologies is necessitated by socio-economic,
environmental or biological factors. Socio-
economic factors include the need to build a
career, the inability to plan a pregnancy.
Environmental and biological factors include
unfavorable environmental factors and
infertility, which may result from environmental
problems.
It is important to note that different EU countries
have different approaches to assisted
reproductive technologies. In our opinion, the
religious policy of the state becomes important in
this case. For example, the EU countries (Italy,
Poland), where religion plays a significant role,
often ban assisted reproductive methods. Secular
states have a more balanced policy in the legal
regulation of assisted reproductive technologies.
However, not every country has paid much
attention to securing the rights of children born
through the use of reproductive technologies. In
our judgment, even religious states, where the
embryo has a sacred meaning and is subject to
protection, primarily protect the established
religious and ecclesiastical canons. This results
in an ignorance of the interests and rights of the
child.
We can identify radical, democratic and
moderate approaches to the use of assisted
reproductive technologies. This division reflects
general approaches to political ideologies. The
supporters of radical approaches advocate the
preservation of the a ban on any assisted
reproductive technologies. The representatives
of moderate views consider it necessary to let a
person retain the right to decide on these issues.
The individual approaches to determining the
interests of a child born through the use of
modern technology exist already. At the same
Volume 11 - Issue 53
/ May 2022
105
https:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
time, the supporters of democratic approaches
advocate granting reproductive rights to the
entire population without exception.
Accordingly, security of the rights and interests
of children is not a priority for this group, they
focus on the rights and interests of parents.
Table 1 shows examples of countries and their
attitudes towards altruistic and commercial
surrogacy.
Table 1.
The state of surrogacy in some countries.
Item No.
Country
Altruistic surrogacy
Commercial surrogacy
Since
1
Spain
prohibited
prohibited
-
2
Italy
prohibited
prohibited
-
3
Austria
prohibited
prohibited
-
4
Sweden
prohibited
prohibited
-
5
Germany
prohibited
prohibited
-
6
Estonia
prohibited
prohibited
-
7
France
prohibited
prohibited
-
8
Portugal
allowed
prohibited
2016
9
United Kingdom
allowed
prohibited
1985
10
Netherlands
allowed
prohibited
1994
11
Greece
allowed
prohibited
2002
12
Canada
allowed
prohibited
2004
13
Australia
allowed
prohibited
1986
14
Ukraine
allowed
allowed
1997
15
Russia
allowed
allowed
2011
16
USA
allowed
allowed
1980
17
Israel
allowed
allowed
1996
18
Belarus
allowed
allowed
2016
19
Georgia
allowed
allowed
1997
20
Czech Republic
allowed
allowed
2014
Source: authors.
We can see that most leading European countries
prohibit commercial surrogacy. These are the
first attempts to protect both the mother’s
interests and the child’s interests. In most cases,
supporters of those approaches oppose the
objectification of the mother’s and child’s body.
It is also determined that surrogacy agreements
are human trafficking at the bottom of fact. Table
1 contains the data on a total of 20 selected
countries, including 11 EU countries, the United
Kingdom, which withdrew from the EU, and 2
associate members of the EU (Ukraine and
Georgia). In some countries (Austria, Germany,
France, Norway, Sweden, Estonia) violation of
the reproductive legislation is punishable. Non-
commercial surrogacy is not prohibited in the
UK, the Netherlands, Denmark, Portugal and the
Czech Republic. This method is not regulated by
law, while not being prohibited in Greece,
Belgium, Spain and Finland.
So, an analysis was carried out on the example of
the countries of the former Soviet Union to
demonstrate a similar policy on surrogacy.
Ukraine has a long history of using reproductive
technologies. In particular, Ukraine is considered
one of the surrogacy centers. Accordingly,
Ukraine is one of the world’s centers of
children’s organs trafficking, child trafficking,
children resale and further exploitation.
Moreover, children’s life is not controlled or
supervised upon transferring abroad.
Ukraine has significant shortcomings in
legislation and monitoring the future of children
born through surrogacy. Children find
themselves in the EU, Britain and other countries
from Ukraine not only in families that need the
services of a surrogate mother. There are many
cases of selling children as commodities for
organs. So, the lack of control over the future of
children and proper inspection of customers of
relevant services in Ukraine violates the rights of
children, making them a commodity and
contributing to the objectification of surrogacy
services.
106
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
We believe that the adoption of the Convention
on the Rights of the Child (United Nations, 1989)
is one of the reasons for the changes. The EU
didn’t have the approach to the rights of children
born to surrogate mothers. The issue of
protection of the rights of such children in
accordance with the Convention on the Rights of
the Child has been raised only in recent years.
Article 7 stipulates that a child has the right to
know his or her parents; a child has the right to
life according to Article 6. Article 35 provides
that states must prevent child trafficking. Most
EU countries agree that the birth of children
through surrogacy violates children’s rights and
contributes to the objectification of both children
and mothers. This is why commercial surrogacy
is significantly limited in EU countries.
Unfortunately, we can see a negative trend in
child trafficking in Ukraine, which stains both
the country’s reputation and the
decriminalization of crimes against children in
general.
There is a conflict of interest of potential parents
and the child in resolving this issue. It is
important to note that the interests of the child are
not taken into account when using assisted
reproductive technologies.
This issue should be considered in detail as
Ukraine is considered one of the centers of
commercial reproductive business, supplying
surrogate mothers (Table 2). According to
statistics, there are about 500 surrogate
pregnancies in Ukraine per year (Lytvyn &
Hrudieva, 2021). There is no more accurate
official data in Ukraine as of the beginning of
2022. There are approximately 40 reproductive
medicine clinics operating in Ukraine with an
annual volume of about 2,000 operations per year
(Caritas Ukraine, 2021).
We surfed the web for propositions to become a
surrogate mother in Ukraine. We selected 10
propositions by the method of analysis and
systematization to compare in this article. The
analysis of Table 2 allowed stating that the
requirements for surrogate mothers are similar in
different clinics and medical centers. Moreover,
the allowable age of a potential surrogate mother
varies from 18 to 44 years. In addition to the
health requirements of a potential surrogate
mother.
Table 2.
Available propositions of surrogacy in Ukraine as of 2022.
Item
No.
Proposition
Resource
Requirements for the mother
Payment
Age
Children
Health
1
Artemida
Surrogacy
Centre
https://arte
mida.ua/
19-36
1+
Good health and no bad
habits; no caesarean section;
Rh positive
Up to
EUR
25,000
2
IVMed
Fertility
Centre
https://mam
asur.com.ua
37-21
1+
No bad habits; no medical
contra-indications to
pregnancy; mentally healthy
woman; Rh positive
EUR
15,000
3
Ya Mama
Surrogacy
Centre
https://ima
ma.com.ua/
ua/
19-36
1+
No hereditary diseases; Rh
positive; no bad habits; no
caesarean section
EUR
18,000 to
EUR
25,000
4
Ukraina
Surrogacy
Centre
https://surro
gacy.com.u
a/
19-36
1+
No hereditary diseases;
positive Rh; no bad habits;
no caesarean section
From
EUR
14,000
5
Yuzko
Medical
Centre
https://ivf.u
a/hochu-
buti-
surogatnoy
u-matirjyu/
21-35
1+
No medical contra-
indications
No data
6
BioTexCom
Clinics
https://biote
xcom.com.
ua/uk/pro-
kliniku//
18-44
1+
Mental and physical health;
no bad habits
Up to
EUR
29,200
Volume 11 - Issue 53
/ May 2022
107
https:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
7
Adonis
Family
Solutions
agency
https://fertil
itysolutions
agency.kiev
.ua/contact-
us/
18-35
1+
No bad habits; no mental or
oncological diseases; no
hereditary chronic
gynaecological and genetic
diseases, no HIV or
tuberculosis, etc.
Up to
EUR
29,200
8
Maternitate
Surrogacy
Centre
https://bespl
odie.net.ua/
anketa-
uchasnyka/
19-44
1+
No hereditary diseases; Rh
positive; no bad habits; no
caesarean section
EUR
14,000
9
Mama Plus
Reproductol
ogy Centre
https://suro
gatnoemate
rinstvo.com
.ua/uk/
18-43
1+
no medical contra-
indications to childbirth;
good physical and mental
health; psychologically ready
to bear somebody else’s
child and transfer this child
to the biological parents
immediately after birth
Up to
EUR
29,200
10
Surrogacy
Ukraine
https://surro
gacy.net.ua/
contact/
22-36
1+
No medical contra-
indications; moral and
psychological stability;
responsibility; desire to help
a childless couple
EUR
19,000
Source: Adonis Fertility Solutions Agency, (n. d.); Artemida Surrogacy Center (n. d.); BioTexCom Clinics,
(n. d.); IVMed Fertility Center (n. d.); Mama Plus Reproductology Center. (n. d.); Maternitate Surrogacy
Center (n. d.); Surrogacy Ukraine (n. d.); Ukraina Surrogacy Center. (n. d.); Ya Mama Surrogacy Center.
(n. d.); Yuzko Medical Center. (n. d.).
None of the selected examples provides the
security of the child’s right to know his or her
mother after birth. According to the
requirements, the mother also has no right to
refuse to transfer or visit the child after birth.
Moreover, there is no mechanism for monitoring
and appropriate state and protection of children’s
rights. Therefore, Ukrainian practice transforms
surrogacy into child trafficking.
It should be noted that all the studied resources
present the positive experience and benefits of
surrogacy, provide relevant examples. But there
is no information on the risks of surrogacy for the
health of women and children, the adverse
consequences, etc. No Center raised the issues of
moral aspects as well as the rights of the child.
The child is considered the object of trade, which
is subject to transfer under the contract.
Therefore, a potentially positive image of
surrogacy is created and idealized. Furthermore,
there is no information on the surrogate mother’s
possible contact with the child in the future and
the child’s right to know his or her origin and the
surrogate mother.
So, the commercial component is criminalized
and condemned in EU countries, where
surrogacy is recognized as a last resort. In
contrast, there is a tendency to commercialize
this type of reproductive medicine in Ukraine.
All the above indicates the current negative trend
of violation of the rights of the child born through
surrogacy.
We further consider the use of another type of
reproductive medicine: IVF in the EU and
Ukraine. There is a more liberal attitude towards
IVF in the EU in contrast to the negative attitude
towards surrogacy. Moreover, IVF has become
widespread in some countries.
The research found three main positions in the
EU in relation to the IVF procedure:
− the state supports IVF (Denmark);
− permitted at the citizens’ expense (Czech
Republic, Latvia);
− prohibited (Italy).
Directive 2004/23/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council of March 31, 2004
(EUR-Lex, 2009) regulates this issue by setting
standards of quality and safety for the donation,
purchase, testing, treatment, preservation,
storage and distribution of human tissues and
cells. But the national legislation and guidelines
for assisted reproduction in the EU is country-
specific. The EU countries enshrine an important
aspect of a child’s right to know his or her
parents (donors) and origin in their legislation in
different ways. For example, the Federal
108
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
Republic of Germany provides the right of
children to know the identity of their biological
parents.
The study of the examples of IVF in the UK
indicated a fairly high rates of application of in
vitro fertilization (National Health Service UK,
n. d).
So, we can state that approaches to supporting
and securing the interests of the child are
gradually evolving in Europe. The rights of the
child are becoming increasingly important
despite the existence of different approaches to
the use of assisted reproductive technologies.
Discussion
The problem of the rights of children born
through the use of assisted reproductive
technologies has become pressing in recent years
on a global scale, where assisted reproductive
technologies themselves have raised significant
questions. The development of assisted
reproductive technologies results in the
emergence of new forms of childbearing, family
reproduction and filiation practices, which raise
the issue of the need and the way of legal
recognition of these new family structures (Haug
& Milewski, 2019). Therefore, the issue of
protecting the interests of the child from a legal,
socio-economic, biological and ethical
perspective has become urgent.
Scholars admit that the further struggle related to
these technologies will become fiercer and more
difficult as the pool of knowledge base expands
(Gryshchenko et al., 2021; Honkasalo, 2018).
Different EU countries have different approaches
to assisted reproductive technologies. For
example, there are 21 fertility clinics in
Denmark, nine of which are state-funded and
twelve are privately funded.
In general, the European Parliament renounced
surrogacy by adopting its Resolution of
December 13, 2016. On February 2, 2016, were
signed the Paris Charter, calling on European
countries to respect the international Convention
for the Protection of Human Rights that they
have ratified. Sixteen organizations from 18 EU
countries have recently signed a call to stop
surrogacy. It was recognized that such
procedures violate the rights of the child
(Marinelli, 2020).
There is another approach to this issue, which
relies on the principle of exercising parental
rights by infertile couples. The laws of Ukraine
do not provide a detailed regulation of the
surrogacy procedure (Mendzhul, 2019).
Researchers emphasize that the surrogacy
procedure does not adequately addresses the
interests of the child, while meeting the interests
of adults in the first place. The children
themselves experience the greatest
manipulations, as they are deprived of the right
to a decent way of conception and birth, to
knowing of their biological parents (Yarema,
2019). For this purpose, the Constitutional Court
of Germany has ruled in 1989 that children have
the right to know the identity of their biological
parents. That resulted in the creation of a
database of donors in July 2018 at the German
Institute for Medical Documentation and
Information in Cologne. The information should
be kept until the child approves it, or for 110
years (Isenson, 2018). The citizenship of the
new-born child is also the problem. Furthermore,
the child is unprotected in cases where the
intended parents and the surrogate mother
abandon the child. Those children are sent to an
orphanage in most cases.
Another threat was posed by the emergency
caused by COVID-19 restrictions (Rallo et al.,
2021). Some 2022 studies found that the global
pandemic COVID-19 posed an epidemiological
and social threat at all levels, but did not have a
significant impact on the state and legal
regulation of the reproductive business in the
world (Rodríguez-Varela et al., 2022).
There is a growing number of court cases in
Europe regarding disputes over the possibility of
using embryos created through IVF by a former
spouse. The cases on the struggle for custody of
a child born to a gestational surrogate mother,
etc. also remain unresolved (Crockin, Altman &
Edmonds, 2021). Therefore, there are still many
controversial issues to be studied and resolved
even despite quite successful practices.
Conclusions
The use of assisted reproductive technologies has
been prompted by the development of
technologies and the increasing infertility rates.
There are different approaches to the issues of
using assisted reproductive technologies due to
both social, religious and ethical factors. As of
2022, the right to a healthy life, the right to know
their history and other rights of children born
through the use of reproductive technologies are
not properly protected. So, surrogacy is the
reason and method of child trafficking. In
Volume 11 - Issue 53
/ May 2022
109
https:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
general, the approaches to understanding the
possibility of using assisted reproductive
technologies are different in Ukraine and the EU:
while surrogacy is prohibited in most of the EU
countries, the whole surrogacy business is
established in Ukraine. It should be noted that the
COVID-19 pandemic of 2019-2022, which has
complicated realization of the rights of children
born through surrogacy, has become a pressing
issue for all countries.
Therefore, we can conclude that the EU countries
and Ukraine have different approaches to the use
of assisted reproductive technologies. The EU is
more committed to protecting the rights of the
child. But we should note a significant expansion
in the understanding of the risks of assisted
reproductive technologies in recent years. We
can state that the European countries have
conflicting approaches to regulating this issue.
The findings of this research would allow a more
effective and systemic approach to the
development of reproductive policy in Ukraine,
as well as its adaptation to the EU regulations.
Determining the peculiarities of reproductive
tourism in Ukraine is considered to the prospects
for further research in this area.
Bibliographic references
Adonis Fertility Solutions Agency. (n. d.).
Adonis Family Solutions Agency. Retrieved
from https://fertilitysolutionsagency.kiev.ua/
Artemida Surrogacy Center. (n. d.). Artemida
Surrogacy Center. Retrieved from
https://artemida.ua/
Basay, N. M. (2014). The concept of surrogacy.
Subcarpathian Law Herald, 3, 58-64.
Retrieved from
http://www.pjv.nuoua.od.ua/v3_2014/06.pdf
BioTexCom Clinics. (n. d.). BioTexCom Clinics.
Retrieved from https://biotexcom.com.ua/
Caritas Ukraine. (2021). Study “Child trafficking
in Ukraine: Selling children and surrogacy”.
Retrieved from http://caritas.ua/wp-
content/uploads/2021/06/rezultaty-
doslidzhennya-torgivlya-ditmy-v-ukrayini-
prodazh-ditej-ta-surogatne-materynstvo-
povne-vydannya.pdf
Crockin, S.L., Altman, A.B., & Edmonds, M.A.
(2021). The history and future trends of ART
medicine and law. Family Court Review, 59,
22-45. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12550
EUR-Lex. (2009). Directive 2004/23/EC of the
European Parliament and of the Council of 31
March 2004 on setting standards of quality
and safety for the donation, procurement,
testing, processing, preservation, storage and
distribution of human tissues and cells.
Retrieved from https://eur-
lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32004L0
023
Gryshchenko, I. M., Denysova, A. V.,
Ovsiannikova, O. O., Buha, H. S., &
Kiselyova, E. I. (2021). Means for control
over the activities of public authorities by
civic democratic institutions: the conceptual
framework analysis. Cuestiones Políticas,
39(69), 796-813.
https://doi.org/10.46398/cuestpol.3969.49
Haug, S., & Milewski, N. (2019). Women’s
attitudes toward assisted reproductive
technologies – a pilot study among migrant
minorities and non-migrants in
Germany. Comparative Population
Studies, 43, 343-371.
https://doi.org/10.12765/CPoS-2019-06
Honkasalo, J. (2018). Unfit for parenthood?
Compulsory sterilization and transgender
reproductive justice in Finland. Journal of
International Women's Studies, 20(1), 40-52.
Isenson, N. (2018, May 3). 5 facts about IVF
parenting in Europe - what you need to know.
DW. Retrieved from
https://www.dw.com/en/5-facts-about-ivf-
parenting-in-europe-what-you-need-to-
know/a-43635871
IVMed Fertility Center (n. d.). IVMed Fertility
Center. Retrieved from
https://mamasur.com.ua
Lytvyn, O., & Hrudieva, K. (2021). Current
issues of legal regulation of surrogacy in
Ukrainian modern law. Administrative Law
and Process, 1, 149-152.
https://doi.org/10.32849/2663-
5313/2021.1.25
Madeira, J. L. (2015). The ART of informed
consent: Assessing patient perceptions,
behaviors, and lived experience of IVF and
embryo disposition informed consent
processes. Faculty Scholarship at Digital
Repository @ Maurer Law. Retrieved from
https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/
viewcontent.cgi?article=2952&context=facp
ub
Mama Plus Reproductology Center. (n. d.).
Mama Plus Reproductology Center.
Retrieved from
https://surogatnoematerinstvo.com.ua/uk/
Marinelli, S. (2020). No more only one mom?
European Court of Human Rights and Italian
jurisprudences’ ongoing evolution. La
Clinica Terapeutica, 170(1), e36-e43. doi:
10.7417/CT.2020.2186
Maternitate Surrogacy Center. (n. d.).
Maternitate Surrogacy Center. Retrieved
110
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
from https://besplodie.net.ua
Medical Center “Leleka” (n. d.). In vitro
fertilization (IVF). Retrieved from
https://leleka.zt.ua/ua/articles/eko
Mendzhul, M. V. (2019). Comparative analysis
of the legal basis of surrogacy. Comparative
Analytical Law [Porivnyal’no-Analitychne
Pravo], 2, 77-79. [In Ukraine]
Mishtal, J. (2019). Reproductive governance and
the (re)definition of human rights in
Poland. Medical Anthropology, 38(2), 182-
194.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01459740.2018.1472
090
Mohr, S., & Koch, L. (2016). Transforming
social contracts: the social and cultural
history of IVF in Denmark. Reproductive
Biomedicine & Society Online, 2, 88-96.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbms.2016.09.001
Montanari Vergallo, G. (2019). A child of two
mothers: what about the father? Italian
overview. Acta Biomedica Atenei Parmensis,
90(3), 319–325.
https://doi.org/10.23750/abm.v90i3.7970
National Health Service UK. (n. d.). Overview.
IVF. Retrieved from
https://nhs.uk/conditions/ivf/
Rallo, G., Negro, F., Consalvo, F., Piersanti, V.,
& Marinelli, S. (2021). Medically assisted
procreation in times of COVID-19: What
impact on health care system organization
and the reproductive rights of couples? Acta
Biomedica Atenei Parmensis, 92(5),
e2021275.
https://doi.org/10.23750/abm.v92i5.11900
Rodríguez-Varela, C., Mariani, G., Dolz, P.,
García-Velasco, J. A., Serra, V., Pellicer, A.,
& Labarta, E. (2022). Impact of COVID-19
on infertility treatments: not even a global
pandemic was strong enough to hamper
successful pregnancies. Life, 12, 6.
https://doi.org/10.3390/life12010006
Somerville, M. (2007). Children’s human rights
and unlinking child–parent biological bonds
with adoption, same-sex marriage and new
reproductive technologies. Journal of Family
Studies, 13(2), 179-201.
https://doi.org/10.5172/jfs.327.13.2.179
Surrogacy Ukraine. (n. d.). Surrogacy Ukraine.
Retrieved from
https://surrogacy.net.ua/contact/
Ukraina Surrogacy Center. (n. d.). Ukraina
Surrogacy Center. Retrieved from
https://surrogacy.com.ua/
United Nations. (1989, November 20). UN
Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Retrieved from
https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalintere
st/pages/crc.aspx
Ya Mama Surrogacy Center. (n. d.). Ya Mama
Surrogacy Center. Retrieved from
https://imama.com.ua/ua/
Yarema, M. (2019). Surrogate motherhood:
Ethical issues. Annals of the UCU. Series 12:
Theology, 6, 343-358. [In Ukraine]
Yuzko Medical Center. (n. d.). Yuzko Medical
Center. Retrieved from https://ivf.ua