Problematic wording that saw Malta’s IVF rules fall foul of human rights laws was changed years ago when the matter was first raised.
Last week, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that a Maltese couple’s human rights were violated when their request to go through a second round of fertility treatment had been rejected.
At the time of the couple’s second request, the eligibility age bracket endorsed by Malta was between 25 and 42. The woman, however, was 43.
The Strasbourg-based court ruled that, according to Malta’s IVF protocols, the eligibility parameters laid out the age when it was “desirable” to undergo treatment. This phrasing was deemed to be “incoherent and, thus, lacked the required foreseeability”.
Asked about the judgment, a spokesperson for Health Minister Chris Fearne said the European Court of Human Rights had not found that the age limits violated human rights but, rather, that the wording was too loose.
The spokesperson said the protocol had been updated in 2018 and the word desirable has been removed.
Meanwhile, the government is moving ahead with a rewrite of Malta’s IVF laws and presented amendments to existing laws during parliament's first session on Monday afternoon.
Those legislative changes, tabled by Health Minister Chris Fearne, are being fast-tracked through parliament, with the Labour Party having pledged to revise IVF laws within its first 100 days of government.
Laws will be amended to expand eligibility criteria for the taxpayer-funded fertility treatment, with the Labour Party saying it wants to help couples who suffered from miscarriages, those who ended cycles of IVF that were unsuccessful and couples who have a history of medical complications.
What happened at the court in Strasbourg?
The ECHR judgment concerned Natasha and Gilbert Lia. After unsuccessful attempts at having children, they were given medical advice to attempt assisted procreation in-vitro fertilisation, or IVF.
In September 2014, the couple underwent a procedure known as Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection at St James Conception Unit at the state’s expense.
The treatment is provided by the government free of charge to subjects satisfying the Maltese Embryo Protection Authority’s protocol.
However, the treatment was unsuccessful and, although the applicants requested another cycle of treatment, the authority refused the request.
At the time of the second request, the age bracket endorsed by Malta was between 25 and 42. The Lias argued Malta was violating Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Eventually, they were awarded €8,000 in compensation.