Guilherme de Oliveira made equal considerations about the Portuguese system. The article is dated 1994, when legislation on assisted reproduction did not yet exist in Portugal. Oliveira, Guilherme. Legislar sobre Procriação Assistida. In Temas de Direito da Medicina, 2nd ed. (Coimbra: Coimbra Editora, 2005), pp. 89–104.Google Scholar

Full report available online at: www.cnpma.org.pt/Docs/CNPMA_Relatorio_2010.pdf.Google Scholar

Raposo, Vera Lúcia. De mãe para mãe: questões legais e éticas suscitadas pela maternidade de substituição (Coimbra: Coimbra Editora, 2005), p. 70.Google Scholar

The full text of the resolution is available online at: http://www.portalmedico.org.br/resolucoes/CFM/2015/2121_2015.pdf.Google Scholar

See, in this sense, Dantas, Eduardo, and Coltri, Marcos. Comentários ao Código de Ética Médica (Rio de Janeiro: Editora GZ, 2010), p. 99.Google Scholar

Guilherme de Oliveira indicated something similar about Portugal. See Oliveira, Guilherme. Legislar sobre Procriação Assistida. In Temas de Direito da Medicina, 2nd ed. (Coimbra: Coimbra Editora, 2005), pp. 91–2.Google Scholar

On the specific issues of assisted reproduction by homosexuals in Brazil and Portugal, see Homoafetividade e Direito. Between pages 239 and 253 of the book there is a chapter dedicated to the analysis of ART by homosexual couples and individuals in Brazil and Portugal. Cf. Chaves, Marianna. Homoafetividade e Direito: ProteçãoConstitucional, Uniões, Casamento e Parentalidade. Uma Perspectiva Luso-Brasileira, 2nd ed. (Curitiba: Juruá, 2012).Google Scholar

The expression “when other treatments have been proved ineffective or considered inappropriate” present in the previous resolution was suppressed.Google Scholar

Age limitations did not exist in previous resolutions.Google Scholar