Affiliations: [a] Department of Anatomical, Histological, Forensic and Orthopaedic Sciences, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy | [b] Fertilitas Day Surgery Reproductive Medicine, Salerno, Italy
Correspondence:
[*]
Address for correspondence: Andrea Cioffi, Department of Anatomical, Histological, Forensic and Orthopaedic Sciences, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy. E-mail: [email protected]
Abstract: BACKGROUND:According to the World Health Organization (WHO), any woman in childbearing age who have decided not to take permanently an oral contraceptive but who are sexually active has the right to access emergency contraception (EC). Despite this, in many European countries there are no specific laws governing the criteria for access to emergency oral contraceptives (EOCs) for girls under 18, especially about the need for third party consent. This normative vacuum is dangerous as it risks creating confusion and entrusting the management of the fundamental right of self-determination to the discretion of others. Moreover, in European Union (EU) countries, there is an inequality in terms of access to contraceptive supplies, reimbursement criteria and the availability of information online. OBJECTIVE:Our article compares the criteria for access to EOCs (Ulipristal Acetate-UPA and Levonorgestrel-LNG) in the various EU countries to highlight possible disparities and consequent inequalities. METHODS:Government and ministerial websites, European agencies websites, and Contraceptive Use by Method 2019 (WHO) have been consulted. RESULTS:There are some differences between the various European countries that could configure inequality in EU countries. CONCLUSIONS:It would be appropriate a definitive levelling of the legislation of the European Union on emergency contraception associated with massive information and awareness campaigns.
