Bioethics in 2026: what developments can we expect at Belgian and European level?

Artificial reproduction (ART): access to origins and donor monitoring 

With regard to artificial reproduction, the coming months will certainly continue to be marked by the consequences of the revelations concerning the lack of effective control of gamete donations (in connection with the Danish donor carrying a cancer-causing gene). Despite recent changes (notably via the SoHo Regulation at EU level and the revision of the Belgian law on ART), the regulatory framework is set to evolve further in this area at national and European level, particularly with regard to the establishment of effective quotas on the number of children that can be conceived using gametes from the same donor (at national, European and even global level). However, the question of the ethical limits of such an approach continues to be raised, particularly with regard to the potential eugenic abuses of ever-increasing control of gametes and embryos in the context of artificial reproduction. 

The other major issue relating to ART concerns access to the origins of children conceived through in vitro fertilisation. In recent years, there has been a growing awareness of the disastrous consequences of using anonymous donors in terms of protecting the interests of children who would be unable to know the identity of their biological parent(s). In Belgium, a bill on this subject, drafted by the Minister of Health, will be discussed in the Federal Parliament in the coming weeks. It provides for the mandatory lifting of donor anonymity, with a three-year transition period during which gametes from anonymous donors will continue to be used. However, lifting anonymity is far from resolving all the difficulties raised by the development of artificial reproduction, not only in terms of the child's identity construction, but also in terms of the increased health risks that this practice presents for the woman and the child born through this method of reproduction. 

Surrogacy at a crossroads 

At the centre of bioethical news in 2025, the practice of surrogacy will undoubtedly continue to be the subject of new developments this year. While calls for a global abolition of surrogacy are now being heard from United Nations bodies, it remains to be seen whether new states will follow suit in 2026, following the example of reforms voted in Italy, Spain and Slovakia aimed at banning surrogacy agreements. Belgium's position will be closely monitored in this regard: while the government agreement signed in January 2025 provides for the legalisation of so-called ‘non-commercial’ surrogacy, and Justice Minister Annelies Verlinden (CD&V) has committed to preparing a text to this effect, official criticism of this practice by the EU and the UN calls this approach into question. The European project for the mandatory cross-border recognition of parental status for couples commissioning a child through surrogacy is still blocked at the level of the Council of Ministers of the European Union, with no prospect of the text being adopted in the coming months. Such a reform, also envisaged at international level by the Hague Convention, would probably result in the de facto legalisation of surrogacy, through the obligation for each State to recognise acts of filiation linked to surrogacy practised abroad. 

End of life: euthanasia and assisted suicide at the heart of parliamentary debates 

In terms of end-of-life care, while there is growing awareness of the need to develop palliative care across Europe (where disparities in access remain significant between countries), national debates remain paradoxically focused on euthanasia and assisted suicide. 

Several bills or proposals on programmed death already under discussion may reach the end of their parliamentary process by the end of 2026. This is particularly the case in France, with the bill on the ‘right to assistance in dying’. Concerns remain about the content of the bill, both in terms of the lack of effective safeguards and the infringement of freedom of conscience (via the offence of obstruction) and the freedom of healthcare institutions that oppose euthanasia. 

In the United Kingdom, two bills on ‘assisted dying’ are under discussion in Westminster (for England and Wales) and in the Scottish Parliament, with the outcome of the debates unclear at this stage, as parliamentarians appear hesitant and divided on the issue. 

The Belgian federal parliament will examine a bill to extend the law on euthanasia to people who have become unable to express their wishes (stroke victims, Alzheimer's patients, etc.), provided they have made this choice in an advance directive. The positive opinion issued by the Advisory Committee on Bioethics in December 2025, combined with the fact that the federal government's agreement provides for such a change, seems to give this amendment every chance of success. However, there are still major ethical concerns, particularly regarding the prospect of euthanasia being performed on a person who does not confirm their wish to die at the moment of the act. 

The UN's repeated condemnations in 2025 of Canadian legislation and the French bill, pointing to the risks that these texts pose to the right to life of persons with disabilities, could, however, tip the balance. This is evidenced by the recent repeal by the Slovenian people, via referendum, of the law on assisted suicide. 

Abortion: attempts to liberalise and constitutionalise the practice 

Presented to the European Commission in 2025, the European citizens' initiative ‘My Voice My Choice’ aims to make abortion accessible throughout Europe by covering the costs incurred by women travelling to another EU Member State to have an abortion. Supported by a majority of MEPs last December, the initiative must now be examined by the Commission, whose opinion on the matter is expected by the end of March. However, this proposal appears to exceed the powers devolved to the EU, as the legal status of abortion remains an ethical issue on which each state has sovereign authority. 

In Belgium, discussions on liberalising the conditions for abortion are likely to take a new turn by the summer of 2026: the government majority has committed to Minister Verlinden tabling a bill in the federal parliament before the parliamentary recess in July. The question of the content of such a bill remains open, with regard to the possible extension of the abortion time limit, the maintenance of a mandatory reflection period, and guarantees regarding the freedom of conscience of healthcare professionals. 

It should be noted that, at the same time, there is also discussion of enshrining abortion in the Belgian Constitution, following the example of France in 2024, which recognised the ‘freedom to resort’ to abortion. Hearings with academic experts on this subject will be held in the coming weeks in a parliamentary committee. Beyond the questions raised by the idea of reducing abortion to a ‘right’ or a ‘fundamental freedom’, this proposed revision faces a legal obstacle, as such a reform is not included among the amendments listed in the declaration of revision of the Constitution valid under this legislature. 

Research on human embryos: towards a challenge to the 14-day limit? 

Research programmes on human embryos – involving their destruction or even the creation of embryos solely for research purposes – raise profound ethical questions. Among the countries that authorise this practice, the 14-day limit on the life of an embryo is accepted as standard practice both legally and ethically. However, there have been some attempts to challenge this limit in recent years, particularly in the United Kingdom, where the relevant agency has been advocating an extension to 28 days since last year. Legislative proposals to lower this ethical threshold cannot therefore be ruled out in certain countries. 

Artificial intelligence and neurotechnologies 

As the bioethical implications of new technologies become increasingly apparent, the regulation of artificial intelligence and neurotechnologies in the field of health is more essential than ever. This is evidenced by the various recommendations published on the subject in 2025 by numerous intergovernmental organisations (UNESCO, Council of Europe, WHO). At European level, the EU continues to exert considerable influence in this area. In 2026, it remains to be seen what action will be taken on the BioTech Act recently proposed by the European Commission. Similarly, specific and adequate regulation of brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) at European level now seems essential. 

Organ donation: growing questions about the NRP reperfusion technique 

In the field of post mortem organ donation, organ reperfusion using the NRP technique (normothermic regional perfusion) is becoming increasingly common. This method involves using an extracorporeal circulation circuit to restore blood flow in the body after the donor's death and, according to some, improves the quality of the organs harvested. The major ethical issue raised by this new technique relates to the preventive occlusion of the vessels to the brain, to avoid any risk of restarting brain activity in a patient who has already been declared dead. This therefore calls into question the rule of deceased donors. In 2026, it will be important to pay attention to the position taken by European hospitals and transplant centres on this issue, particularly in Belgium and other countries in the EuroTransplant network, where the technique is still the subject of heated debate.