Last February, the Italian Parliament gave final approval to a new Law regulating assisted reproduction technology. The new legislation fell short of the expectations of infertile couples and of all specialists in the field. There are three problems with the new Italian law; they involve social issues, human rights and the application of technology. The present paper focuses on the fact that the new rules infringe upon basic human rights and the proper application of IVF technology, because they mandate procedures that are against the best interest of the woman seeking pregnancy. The main point of controversy is the combination of a mandatory limit of three embryos for transfer, and an obligation to reimplant all produced embryos; cryopreservation of excess embryos is prohibited. Obviously, this decreases the chances of most women to achieve pregnancy, while at the same time it increases the number and complexity of procedures they need to undergo and may expose some to an unacceptable increase in the risk of multiple pregnancy. The new law is inspired by the desire to protect every newly produced embryo; this is a commendable aim, although it is in total opposition to a law passed over 25 years ago that liberalized voluntary termination of first trimester pregnancies. This means that today Italy has a law that protects every early, pre-implantation embryo, and another that allows the 'suppression' of every post-implantation one. From a technical point of view, given the low level of human fecundity, the only way to prevent the 'loss' of even one preimplantation embryo is to simply ban IVF altogether, an option that Italian legislators obviously did not have the courage to opt for. The tragedy is that Italian infertile couples are now confronted with new rules that not only severely limit the ability of physicians to correctly apply IVF technology, but are so confused that, depending on the interpretation, anyone may try to nullify the main ideological premise upon which the entire law has been structured.
Modern contraceptive technology is more than a technical advance: it has brought about a true social revolution, the 'first reproductive revolution' in the history of mankind. This latter was followed in rapid succession by other major changes in human reproductive strategies. In the human species, sexual activity began to lose its exclusive reproductive meaning at an early stage of its evolution. Human beings must have practiced non-conceptive sex from the outset and therefore must have had a need to avoid, rather than to seek conception during intercourse from time immemorial. The search for methods to control fertility went on for millennia, but a valid solution was only found during the twentieth century, when the population explosion had forever changed the shape of humanity: in only one century the total population of the planet had grown from some 1.6 billion to more than 6 billion. That increase will remain unique in the history of Homo sapiens. At the global level, contraception provided a tool to deal with overpopulation and, in only 50 years, went a long way towards its resolution. However, to solve the problem, national and international family planning initiatives were required. For individuals, contraception also meant a revolution. It allowed sexual intercourse without reproduction. Only 25 years later, in vitro fertilisation permitted childbearing without sexual intercourse. Other advances followed and now cloning, that is, reproduction without the two gametes, looms on the horizon. Such a series of rapid, major changes in human reproductive strategies has confused many. For this reason, a constructive dialogue between sociology and biology is mandatory. Contraception is a powerful tool to promote equity between sexes; it improves women's status in the family and in the community. Avoiding pregnancy during the teens increases opportunities for a young woman's education, training and employment. By controlling their fertility, women get a chance to contribute economically to their household, which in turn may give them a greater share in decision-making. There are other specific areas in which contraception has produced beneficial social effects, first and foremost in reducing the need for induced abortion. It has also helped avoiding sexually-transmitted infections and is a very useful tool for educating youngsters to adopt more responsible sexual behaviors. Interventions in the field of family planning are among the most cost-effective health interventions.
Progestin-only minipills have been available for over three decades, yet their use has been limited, because of a documented lower efficacy when compared to pills that combine estrogen and progestin. The availability of a new low-dose progestin-only minipill containing 75 microg desogestrel (DSG) offers a new perspective, since, in a large multicenter study, this minipill gave a crude Pearl index of 0.41 and an adjusted one of 0.14, which is comparable to indices found in clinical trials of oral contraceptives. This minipill also allows for a 12-hour tolerance time in taking the pill. The high effectiveness of the DSG minipill is attributable to an almost constant inhibition of ovulation, as shown by the absence of elevated progesterone circulating levels and inhibition of follicular growth in the vast majority of cycles studied. Since irregular bleeding patterns are observed with all minipills, patterns experienced with DSG 75 microg have been compared to those obtained with levonogestrel 30 microg. As expected, the more pronounced ovarian inhibition produced wider bleeding variability with DSG, but also less bleeding overall. The DSG minipill is suitable for lactating women and represents a valuable addition to oral contraception.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.