«Cosa resta del padre?». A margine della decisione della Corte costituzionale sulla revoca del consenso alla PMA da parte dell’ex partner

In its judgment n. 161/2023, the Constitutional Court declared unfounded the question of the legitimacy of art. 6, par. 3, of Law No. 40 of 2004, in the part in which it does not provide for the revocation of the consent given by man after the fertilization of the egg but before the implantation of the embryo. Although the legal context in which the provision currently stands has changed radically, the judge of laws has considered that the balancing of constitutional interests defined therein is not unreasonable. The article critically examines the arguments in support of the decision, reflecting in particular on the paternity and possible slippages that could result from an "emotional" reading of the judgment.