IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i4p2371-d752745.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Update on Planned Oocyte Cryopreservation (POC) in Italy: Medical, Epidemiological and Legal Consideration

Author

Listed:
  • Jessica Cremonese

    (Galileian School of Higher Education, University of Padova, 35121 Padova, Italy)

  • Marianna Marcon

    (Galileian School of Higher Education, University of Padova, 35121 Padova, Italy)

  • Laura Oppi

    (Galileian School of Higher Education, University of Padova, 35121 Padova, Italy)

  • Giulia Paletti

    (Galileian School of Higher Education, University of Padova, 35121 Padova, Italy)

  • Vincenzo Romolo

    (Galileian School of Higher Education, University of Padova, 35121 Padova, Italy)

  • Pamela Tozzo

    (Legal Medicine Unit, Department of Cardiac, Thoracic, Vascular Sciences and Public Health, University of Padova, 35121 Padova, Italy)

  • Luciana Caenazzo

    (Legal Medicine Unit, Department of Cardiac, Thoracic, Vascular Sciences and Public Health, University of Padova, 35121 Padova, Italy)

Abstract

Starting with a brief socioeconomic analysis of the phenomenon of female fertility, this narrative review aims to provide an analysis of the use and possibilities of medically assisted reproductive technology in combating fertility issues, adopting socioeconomic, legal and medical perspectives in Italy. The authors mainly employ data from the annual reports of the National Registry of Medically Assisted Reproduction (PMA Registry) and the Italian Statistical Institute (ISTAT) to understand the evolution of oocyte use in medically assisted reproductive technology in Italy from 2015 to 2018 and in particular to dissect the possibilities of oocyte cryopreservation as a measure to counteract age-related infertility, specifically through Planned Oocyte Cryopreservation (POC), also known as “social freezing”. It seems that the best course of action in the context of medically assisted reproduction would be the use of young and healthy cryopreserved oocytes (autologous or donated), preferably before the age of 40, while encouraging donation of oocytes whenever possible. Italy’s dependence on foreign biobanks for donated oocytes calls for the institution of a national biobank and further specific regulation of gamete donation. For this reason, it would be useful to encourage the acceptance of Planned Oocyte Cryopreservation to allow greater availability of healthy, younger oocytes.

Suggested Citation

  • Jessica Cremonese & Marianna Marcon & Laura Oppi & Giulia Paletti & Vincenzo Romolo & Pamela Tozzo & Luciana Caenazzo, 2022. "An Update on Planned Oocyte Cryopreservation (POC) in Italy: Medical, Epidemiological and Legal Consideration," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-17, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:4:p:2371-:d:752745
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/4/2371/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/4/2371/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter McDonald, 2000. "Gender Equity in Theories of Fertility Transition," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 26(3), pages 427-439, September.
    2. Richard Blundell & Alan Duncan & Julian McCrae & Costas Meghir, 2000. "The labour market impact of the working families’ tax credit," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 21(1), pages 75-103, March.
    3. Maria Rita Testa, 2007. "Childbearing preferences and family issues in Europe: evidence from the Eurobarometer 2006 survey," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 5(1), pages 357-379.
    4. Daniela Del Boca, 2002. "The effect of child care and part time opportunities on participation and fertility decisions in Italy," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 15(3), pages 549-573.
    5. Marcantonio Caltabiano & Maria Castiglioni & Alessandro Rosina, 2009. "Lowest-Low Fertility: Signs of a recovery in Italy?," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 21(23), pages 681-718.
    6. Siv Gustafsson, 2001. "Optimal age at motherhood. Theoretical and empirical considerations on postponement of maternity in Europe," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 14(2), pages 225-247.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Antonio Sarría-Santamera & Antonio Simone Laganà & Milan Terzic, 2022. "Women’s Health and Gynecology: Old Challenges and New Insights," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-6, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Francesca Modena & Concetta Rondinelli & Fabio Sabatini, 2014. "Economic Insecurity and Fertility Intentions: The Case of Italy," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 60(S1), pages 233-255, May.
    2. Marcantonio Caltabiano, 2016. "A turning point in Italian fertility," Journal of Population Research, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 379-397, December.
    3. Maria Rita Testa & Laura Cavalli & Alessandro Rosina, 2014. "The Effect of Couple Disagreement about Child-Timing Intentions: A Parity-Specific Approach," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 40(1), pages 31-53, March.
    4. Nicoletta Balbo & Francesco C. Billari & Melinda Mills, 2013. "Fertility in Advanced Societies: A Review of Research," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 29(1), pages 1-38, February.
    5. Liat Raz-Yurovich, 2012. "Normative and allocation role strain: role incompatibility, outsourcing, and the transition to a second birth in Eastern and Western Germany," MPIDR Working Papers WP-2012-024, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.
    6. Müller, Kai-Uwe & Wrohlich, Katharina, 2020. "Does subsidized care for toddlers increase maternal labor supply? Evidence from a large-scale expansion of early childcare," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    7. Maria Rosaria Marino & Marzia Romanelli & Martino Tasso, 2016. "Women at work: the impact of welfare and fiscal policies in a dynamic labor supply model," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 1084, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    8. Roberto Impicciatore & Gianpiero Dalla Zuanna, 2017. "The impact of education on fertility in Italy. Changes across cohorts and south–north differences," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 51(5), pages 2293-2317, September.
    9. Anna Matysiak & Dorota Węziak-Białowolska, 2016. "Country-Specific Conditions for Work and Family Reconciliation: An Attempt at Quantification," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 32(4), pages 475-510, October.
    10. Liat Raz-Yurovich, 2016. "Outsourcing of Housework and the Transition to a Second Birth in Germany," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 35(3), pages 401-417, June.
    11. Matteo Picchio & Claudia Pigini & Stefano Staffolani & Alina Verashchagina, 2021. "If not now, when? The timing of childbirth and labor market outcomes," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(6), pages 663-685, September.
    12. Xiana Bueno & Ignacio Pardo, 2023. "Gender-role attitudes and fertility ideals in Latin America," Journal of Population Research, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 1-21, March.
    13. Jonas Wood & Karel Neels & Jorik Vergauwen, 2016. "Economic and Institutional Context and Second Births in Seven European Countries," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 35(3), pages 305-325, June.
    14. Daniela Del Boca, 2015. "Child Care Arrangements and Labor Supply," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 88074, Inter-American Development Bank.
    15. Alberto Cazzola & Lucia Pasquini & Aurora Angeli, 2016. "The relationship between unemployment and fertility in Italy," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 34(1), pages 1-38.
    16. David De Wachter & Karel Neels, 2011. "Educational differentials in fertility intentions and outcomes: family formation in Flanders in the early 1990s," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 9(1), pages 227-258.
    17. Arnstein Aassve & Bruno Arpino & Alice Goisis, 2012. "Grandparenting and mothers’ labour force participation: A comparative analysis using the Generations and Gender Survey," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 27(3), pages 53-84.
    18. Jonas Wood & Karel Neels, 2019. "Local Childcare Availability and Dual-Earner Fertility: Variation in Childcare Coverage and Birth Hazards Over Place and Time," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 35(5), pages 913-937, December.
    19. Anne Gauthier, 2007. "The impact of family policies on fertility in industrialized countries: a review of the literature," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 26(3), pages 323-346, June.
    20. Tom Kornstad & Thor O. Thoresen, 2006. "Effects of family policy reforms in Norway: results from a joint labour supply and childcare choice microsimulation analysis," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 27(3), pages 339-371, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:4:p:2371-:d:752745. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.