The loss of procreative capacity after a road accident involves a profound aspect of health and personal life plans. It is not merely a matter of medico-legal percentages: it can concern fertility, couple life, the way one imagines their future and the necessary care following the trauma. I will explain which elements allow you to claim compensation and why a diagnosis formulated immediately after the accident is not always sufficient to define permanent damage.
Above all, I want to clarify three doubts: whether the loss of reproductive function falls within biological damage, what further consequences may become relevant, and what changes if a fertility difficulty already existed. The answer depends on the proof of the nexus between trauma and injury, clinical stabilization, and the concrete repercussions that are not already included in the ordinary evaluation of disability.
Loss of fertility is damage to health when it stems from the trauma
The starting point is medical. If the accident causes an injury that permanently eliminates or reduces the ability to conceive, carry out a pregnancy or procreate, the prejudice may fall within biological damage. Biological damage is the lesion of psychophysical integrity ascertainable with medico-legal criteria: it therefore considers the compromised function and the normal consequences that such impairment produces in daily life.
The severity of the accident is not enough. It must be proven that the trauma caused the compromise of the reproductive function. Relevant examples include the emergency room, radiological reports, admission records, performed surgeries, subsequent specialist examinations, and a diagnosis linking infertility or sterility to the reported injuries. A simple temporal coincidence between the accident and the diagnosis does not replace this causal connection.
Sexual function and fertility do not always coincide. A trauma can affect procreative capacity without eliminating sexual function, or it can compromise both in different ways. This distinction matters because the medico-legal consultation must describe the actual impairment without confusing different functions or doubling the same consequence.
Permanence must be ascertained with caution. In the months immediately following the accident, therapies, surgical interventions or specialist paths can still modify the clinical picture. The sufferings and limitations of the care period remain relevant as temporary biological damage; the percentage of permanent disability, instead, requires understanding what residual impairment remains once a stable clinical condition is reached.
The percentage of disability does not automatically exhaust compensation
Liquidation starts from the permanent injury. For non-minor road traffic injuries, i.e., with permanent disability exceeding 9 points, the discipline of Article 138 of the Insurance Code is linked to the Single National Table. The regulation adopted with Presidential Decree no. 12 of January 13, 2025 contains the values for disability from 10 to 100 points, also related to the age of the injured person and with a table considering biological damage together with moral damage. You can consult Presidential Decree no. 12 of 2025 published in the Official Gazette.
The date of the accident also matters. The Single National Table entered into force on March 5, 2025 and applies directly to accidents occurring after that date. For previous accidents, the Court of Cassation, with judgment no. 8630 of April 7, 2026, clarified that the table can operate as a general parameter for the equitable assessment of damage to health, albeit without direct application of the transitional discipline. The judge may depart from it only by motivating on truly peculiar circumstances of the case. The principle is illustrated in the sheet of judgment no. 8630 of 2026 of the Court of Cassation.
Moral damage requires autonomous attention. The inner suffering caused by the loss of fertility does not mechanically coincide with the physical impairment. Pain, disorientation, and the perception of a personal loss must be considered without turning the same injury into duplicated compensation items. For this reason, it is important that the claim distinguishes health damage, moral damage, and the specific consequences of the event, explaining how each profile emerges.
There is no fixed sum for sterility. Age, percentage of disability, permanent or partial nature of the compromise, therapeutic possibilities, and concrete incidence of the injuries guide the calculation. Two people with diagnoses formulated with similar words may have a different liquidation if the degree of impairment, clinical documentation, or proven personal consequences are not equal.
When the personalization of damage may become relevant
Personalization is not automatic. The tabular value already remunerates the ordinary consequences of a certain disability. The loss of procreative capacity therefore does not give the right, solely due to the name of the impairment, to a separate item called damage to family life, existential damage, or damage to sexuality. Attributing different amounts to the same physical consequence would lead to a duplication of compensation.
Exceptional consequences must be proved. A specific impact on personal activities and relationships, more serious than that normally associated with the same impairment, may be relevant. It is not enough to say that the event changed one’s life: documented individual circumstances are needed. Any clinically established psychiatric disorder must instead be considered in the overall medico-legal assessment of biological damage, without counting it a second time as personalization.
The increase has precise limits. Article 138 of the Insurance Code allows, in the presence of extraordinary and documented dynamic-relational consequences, an increase of up to 30 percent of the biological component. The Court of Cassation has reiterated that personalization presupposes the concrete ascertainment of the circumstances making the damage more serious than the ordinary case. The criterion is recalled in the civil review of the Court of Cassation relating to order no. 7892 of 2024.
A parental project can be a significant fact. Having already started a medically assisted procreation path, having planned a pregnancy with ongoing treatments, or having received a favorable reproductive prognosis before the accident does not create an automatic additional compensation. However, these circumstances can help describe the concrete scope of the loss, if they are documented and consistent with the health assessment.
Pre-existing conditions change the compensable damage
The damage caused by the accident is compensated. If infertility, gynecological, andrological or endocrinological pathologies, previous surgeries, or already diagnosed reproductive difficulties existed before the accident, these circumstances do not necessarily eliminate the right to compensation. However, they prevent attributing to the responsible party an impairment that was already present before the trauma.
Worsening can be compensable. When the accident aggravates a pre-existing condition, the correct comparison is not between ideal health and health after the accident. Instead, it is necessary to reconstruct, as far as possible, the prior condition and establish which worsening is causally attributable to the road injuries. Old examinations, medical records, and specialist consultations can become decisive precisely because they allow separating what already existed from what was caused or aggravated by the trauma.
Clinical uncertainty must not be hidden. In some cases, medicine does not allow affirming with sufficient certainty whether infertility depends on the accident, an independent pathology, or a combination of multiple factors. In this situation, it is incorrect to present a possibility as a certainty. The compensation claim must be based on the degree of compromise that can be demonstrated, without attributing non-verifiable consequences to the responsible party.
Beyond damage to the person, which costs can be claimed
Medical expenses are a distinct item. Specialist visits, examinations, medications, surgeries, physiotherapy, psychological support, and treatments necessary to cope with the consequences of the trauma can constitute pecuniary loss. They must be linked to the injuries of the accident, appropriate to the clinical picture, and documented. Receipts alone do not always prove the nexus: it is useful for prescriptions and specialist reports to make it understandable why that treatment was necessary.
Future expenses require a concrete basis. Imagining a possible future cost is not enough to obtain an additional amount. If a treatment is planned or reasonably necessary, its prospect must result from reliable clinical indications and verifiable costs. Reimbursement does not replace biological damage: it covers the economic outlay caused by the injuries, while damage to health concerns personal impairment.
Lost income must also be demonstrated. If treatments, hospitalizations, or permanent limitations have affected a work or professional activity, further pecuniary loss may exist. However, it does not automatically derive from the loss of procreative capacity. Elements showing the actual or foreseeable reduction of income are needed, avoiding overlapping unproven economic damage with the liquidation already recognized for disability.
The compensation claim must follow clinical evolution
Documentation must be kept from the beginning. It is advisable to keep together the documents of the accident, emergency room certificates, hospital admission records, and subsequent specialist documentation. Their value does not consist in the number of collected sheets: they must allow following the path connecting the accident dynamics, initial injuries, treatments, and permanent or temporary reproductive consequence.
An anticipated offer deserves caution. An insurance proposal may arrive when the health picture is not yet defined. Accepting and signing an agreement declaring compensation closed may make it difficult to ask for more for damages already included in the definition. Before deciding, it is necessary to understand whether clinical stabilization has actually been reached and whether the proposal distinguishes damage components without leaving out documented care or consequences.
Liability affects the final amount. Compensation presupposes that the accident is attributable, in whole or in part, to another subject. Dynamics, driving conduct, surveys, testimonies, and any contributory negligence can influence the due measure. Health proof demonstrates damage; accident reconstruction instead serves to establish who is responsible and in what proportion.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I claim compensation if I had not planned a pregnancy?
Yes, planning is not a requirement. The compromise of procreative capacity can constitute damage to health even if you did not have an immediate parenting project. Medico-legal ascertainment of the injury and proof that it derives from the accident remain necessary. A concrete project can help describe particular consequences, but does not create the right to compensation on its own.
Does the loss of fertility give the right to a separate damage item?
Not necessarily. As a rule, the impairment of reproductive function enters into the evaluation of biological damage. A second amount cannot be obtained for the same consequence under a different name. A higher liquidation can emerge only if moral sufferings or specific repercussions not already included in the ordinary evaluation of disability are proven.
Can I obtain reimbursement for future care and treatments?
It is possible if the cost is founded. The claim must concern treatments linked to the injuries, clinically indicated and reasonably necessary. Health documents explaining the therapeutic path and reliable elements on the cost are needed. The mere possibility of resorting to a treatment in the future is not enough, while a specialist prescription can make the item concretely evaluable.
What changes if I already had fertility problems?
Worsening is looked at. A previous pathology or difficulty does not absolutely exclude compensation, but prevents attributing damage that already existed to the accident. If the accident worsened a reduced but present function, the compensable damage concerns that difference. Examinations and medical records prior to the event therefore become particularly important.
Must I accept the insurance offer?
No, you are not obliged to accept it. Before signing a proposal, it is essential to verify whether the clinical condition is stabilized, which damages and expenses are considered, and whether the text closes every claim connected to the accident. An agreement can be a useful solution, but should not be evaluated solely based on the indicated amount.
Does the date of the accident affect the calculation?
Yes, it can affect the tabular criterion. For accidents occurring from March 5, 2025, the Single National Table for non-minor traffic injuries operates directly. For previous events, the date does not cancel the right to compensation, but can affect the liquidation parameter used by the judge and the reasoning required to adopt it.
A decision requiring adequate clinical times
Health clarity comes first. In a claim for loss of procreative capacity, precision does not serve to cool down a personal affair: it serves to prevent a permanent injury from being underestimated, duplicated, or attributed without proof to the accident. If you received a diagnosis after an accident and need to understand how to set up the claim, you can contact me.