Medical Liability and Damage from Unwanted Birth: Commentary on Order No. 1903 of 2025

The recent Order No. 1903 of January 27, 2025, from the Supreme Court of Cassation provides important clarifications regarding compensation for damage from unwanted birth, a topic of significant current relevance and sensitivity. The ruling, signed by President F. De Stefano and Rapporteur P. Gianniti, focuses on the civil liability of the physician in relation to voluntary interruption of pregnancy, emphasizing the crucial role of the information provided to patients.

The Context of the Ruling

The Court ruled on a case where the pregnant woman claimed compensation for damages, asserting that she had not been adequately informed about the possibilities for interrupting her pregnancy. According to Italian law, specifically Article 6 of Law No. 194 of 1978, voluntary interruption of pregnancy is only legitimate under specific circumstances. However, if a physician does not provide the necessary information, they may be held liable for the woman's inability to exercise her right to choose.

The Principle of the Ruling

Damage from unwanted birth - Voluntary interruption of pregnancy - Preconditions - Burden of proof - Presumptions - Requirements. In the matter of compensation for damage from unwanted birth resulting from medical liability, since voluntary interruption of pregnancy is legitimate only in exceptional circumstances, the mother's inability to choose that option, attributable to the negligent lack of information from the attending physician, may constitute a source of civil liability provided that: a) the normative prerequisites of Art. 6 of Law No. 194 of 1978 are met; b) the woman's intention not to carry the pregnancy to term is evident. The burden of proof lies with the pregnant woman, but it may also be fulfilled through presumptive means, as long as the prerequisites of the enabling factual situation have been timely alleged and the requirements of seriousness, precision, and concordance provided for by Art. 2729 of the Civil Code are met.

Burden of Proof and Presumptions

A crucial aspect of the ruling is the burden of proof that rests on the pregnant woman. It is essential that the woman demonstrates her intention not to carry the pregnancy to term and that this impossibility was caused by a lack of information from the physician. However, the Court admits that this proof may also be provided through presumptive means, provided that certain requirements of seriousness, precision, and concordance are respected, as established by Article 2729 of the Civil Code.

Conclusions

Order No. 1903 of 2025 from the Supreme Court of Cassation significantly clarifies the delicate balance between women's rights and the responsibilities of health professionals. It recognizes that a lack of information may constitute a violation of the pregnant woman's right to choose, paving the way for potential compensation actions. It is essential that women are fully informed about their rights regarding pregnancy interruption so that they can make informed and free decisions. The ruling represents an important step toward greater protection of women's rights in the healthcare sector.

Bianucci Law Firm