Italy faces backlash over surrogacy and LGBTQ+ families

Since 3 December 2024, international surrogacy has been a criminal offence in Italy. Italian citizens seeking surrogacy abroad can now be punished with three months to two years' imprisonment alongside a fine of €600,000-€1 million. The same penalty applies to anyone who procures, organises or advertises the commercialisation of gametes or embryos in Italy. The latter remains punishable only if committed within Italian territory, whereas surrogacy is punished even if carried out abroad. The new 2024 law reformed the 2004 medically assisted procreation law, which had already criminalised surrogacy within Italian jurisdiction (see BioNews 1263).

The novelty of the 2024 law is that criminalisation applies not only to surrogacy arrangements carried out in Italy (which were already prohibited by the 2004 law), but also to those pursued by Italian citizens abroad. This places Italy in the rare position of being a state that polices reproductive travel. By contrast, many European countries neither legalise nor prosecute international surrogacy, and indeed often recognise it once their citizens return home with the babies. Before the 2024 ban, cases of international surrogacy undertaken by Italian citizens could be criminalised on certain grounds, but only in exceptional circumstances. Yet the new law makes such criminalisation explicit.

The rationale for the new law, used by the legislators, was 'the commercialisation of the female body and the treatment of babies as merchandise'. The law was proposed in the context of Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni's government, whose flagship policy has been the defence of traditional family values. Meloni has been vocal in her opposition to surrogacy and LGBTQ parenting (see BioNews 1178).

However, the current blanket ban overlooks the diversity of surrogacy models and situations, as well as, in particular, the voices of surrogates and egg donors – let alone those of children and parents in families created through surrogacy. While feminist ethnographers have demonstrated ways in which certain surrogacy models or arrangements do not give sufficient decision-making power to women acting as surrogates and egg donors, they have also shown that surrogates and donors often consider themselves to be empowered individuals. Furthermore, the critique of surrogacy as commercialisation is countered by the relationships and kinships that are found to be established within many surrogacy arrangements, including those involving Italian intended parents and surrogates overseas. The blanket ban also ignores altruistic surrogacy models, such as the one that is legal in the UK. This model is, however, available only to British citizens and residents, so only Italians with dual citizenship or residence can access it.

Moreover, contrary to the assumptions underpinning the 2024 law, research has shown that the psychological well-being of children, surrogates and parents involved in both domestic and international arrangements does not differ from that of children and parents in more traditional family forms.

It is yet unclear how exactly the new law will be applied, and whether it is constitutional. Nevertheless, legal commentators suggest that it may introduce one key change. Until recently, Italian citizens who travelled abroad for surrogacy would typically return to Italy with children born through surrogacy and apply for the transcription of their foreign birth certificates. In this way, the children could obtain rights to parental care, healthcare and education, among other things. Depending on the approach of local authorities, at least the genetic father of the child was usually recognised as such in Italy. Since a 2014 court ruling on the so-called 'special cases', the non-genetic parent could apply for step-child adoption, based on the existing relationship with the child.

Yet, according to the legal expert Federica Maccario, a member of the pro-LGBTQ+ legal group Rete Lenford (Avvocatura per i diritti LGBTI+), the new law introduces an unprecedented aspect. Once parents who have used international surrogacy apply to register the child in the Italian system, the civil registry may now automatically report them to the Public Prosecutor's Office. It remains to be seen whether at least the genetic parent will continue to be recognised as such in Italy, based on the principle of the best interests of the child, which has generally been applied until now. However, this may not exempt any of the intended parents from being prosecuted.

Maccario reminds us that surrogacy is often used not only by same-sex couples but also by heterosexual couples and single people. However, the new law affects Italian gay couples particularly strongly, given that their possibilities for having children are more limited. Even though same-sex couples can enter into civil unions in Italy, neither same-sex couples nor single people have the right to adopt children, to use assisted reproductive technologies in Italy, or to establish co-parenting arrangements via home insemination. Within Italian jurisdiction, heterosexual biological parents are legally considered the child's legal parents.

'The new law strikes at the heart of Italian same-sex families and their politics of transparency,' Dr Corinna Guerzoni, an anthropologist from the University of Bologna and the author of the first ethnography of Italian same-sex parent families who used surrogacy and other reproductive technologies abroad, told me in a special comment for this BioNews article. She explained that, until now, transparency has often been a deliberate strategy undertaken by Italian LGBTQ+ families. This gave them visibility in a state where only the biogenetic parent is immediately recognised in legal terms. To pursue stepchild adoption in Italy, intended parents must demonstrate their involvement in the child's life from the very beginning, so they collect relevant documents and often share their reproductive journey within their social circles, or even publicly, as it unfolds.

'It has been seen as a way to normalise the practice, to make gay fatherhood socially accepted,' said Dr Guerzoni. 'However, in the context of the new law, the politics of transparency can no longer be used: gay fathers cannot say it "loud and proud" because it is now recognised as a crime. What I defined as the transparency of conduct will no longer be available. And this will have an impact on children's origin stories as well.' One thing is certain: the new law has undermined rainbow families' strategy of visibility.

What is more, the new law may lead to increased stigmatisation of families created through surrogacy, regardless of whether their parents are heterosexual or gay. The law may have a negative effect on children raised in those families and, thus, it may not in fact serve the best interests of the child. This concern was also expressed by fellow scholars of reproduction, psychologists, anthropologists and sociologists with whom I discussed this issue. So far, research carried out with children raised by LGBTQ+ parents in Italy, including gay fathers through surrogacy, has shown they are no more likely to suffer any adverse health outcomes, but it remains to be seen how they will cope with the impact of the new law.

And yet, many Italian LGBTQ+ families, united in the nationwide organisation Famiglie Arcobaleno (Rainbow Families), continue to protest against the new law and the broader political climate, created by Giorgia Meloni's right-wing government and characterised by explicit hostility towards LGBTQ+ parenthood. Apart from the international surrogacy ban, one of the first actions undertaken by Meloni's government in 2023 was issuing a special directive that instructed local authorities not to recognise the parenting rights of both parents in same-sex relationships. It particularly targeted cases where two same-sex parents applied to be listed on the birth certificate. The directive resulted in letters being sent to non-biological lesbian mothers informing them they would be removed from their children's birth certificates, in cases where lesbian couples had children through reproductive technologies abroad and had their birth certificates transcribed in Italy. Following the new directive, only the biological mothers would retain their parenting rights.

However, many local courts challenged the directive and, for now, most lesbian mothers have not been removed from birth certificates, although some have. Yet, even in those municipalities where the local authorities have not followed the directive, at least for now, lesbian mothers – particularly non-biological ones – have been living with a feeling of vulnerability regarding their parenting rights, as shown by recent research. A few weeks before writing this article, a lesbian mum I spoke to in a large Italian city also expressed feelings of constant vulnerability, even though her parental rights have remained intact for now.

Italian parents through surrogacy, notably same-sex couples, have expressed concerns about returning to the country with babies born through surrogacy in the context of the new law. Such concerns were also raised by a few parents and intended parents through surrogacy with dual British and Italian citizenship I spoke to informally at the last Surrogacy UK conference in April 2025. One Italian-British gay dad I spoke to considered the new law propaganda aimed to instill fear in LGBTQ+ people. Advice from legal experts present in the room suggested it should generally be safe for dual citizens to visit Italy with their families for a holiday; however, it could be much riskier if they attempted to have their birth certificates transcribed in Italy or were planning to raise their children there. This may vary from case to case, so it is difficult to give any advice other than words of extreme caution and the need to consult legal experts in each specific instance.

The situation of LGBTQ+ people intending to become parents in Italy, is further complicated by the fact that no rights to child adoption or the use of reproductive technologies exist in the country beyond heterosexual marriage (see BioNews 1241). In my own work, I have argued that such a state approach can be understood as 'social sterilisation' of LGBTQ+ people. It remains to be seen whether and how LGBTQ+ families will manage to fight back – or to have and raise children despite the legal and political climate.