A lack of government regulation overseeing reproductive technology is failing to protect prospective parents and their would-be kids, lawyers and infertility support groups claim — one year after a landmark Federal Court ruling on the private industry.

Uncertainty about rules on matters such as the collection of donor information, the number of embryos that can be implanted, and compensation for donors and surrogates were expected to be settled following the December 2010 Supreme Court of Canada decision.

But little about the fertility laws has been made clear since then, said Diane Allen, who used assisted reproductive technology 27 years ago to conceive her son, Chris.

The inaction has been appalling, said the Toronto mother and co-founder of the Infertility Network support group.

"It leaves everybody in a real quandary," Allen said. "Nobody really knows what's legal and what's illegal. Patients are confused. They don't know who to believe."

The 2010 Supreme Court judgment upheld the right of provinces to regulate the booming artificial procreation industry, but the government is still studying the decision a year on.

'Patchwork' regulations worrisome

Critics have said the absence of national standards for fertility clinics could lead to "patchwork" regulations across Canada, leading to a boost in so-called "reproductive tourism" that might endanger some patients.

Legal experts point to a few grey areas in particular that they find troubling — ranging from murky guidelines for the number of embryos that should be implanted, to the absence of standards for the collection of health information from sperm and egg donors.

The Assisted Human Reproduction Act:

The Assisted Human Reproduction Act, enacted in 2004, outlaws the payment of a fee to a surrogate for carrying a child, as well as the payment of a fee to someone who sets up surrogates with aspiring parents.

Surrogates can be reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses.

Penalties for violators can range from a maximum fine of $500,000 to up to 10 years in jail.

Trudo Lemmens, who specializes in health law at the University of Toronto, noted, for example, that finding out who a donor is would be problematic without some kind of registry in place for the tracking and collection of donor data.

"In the absence of a federal system gathering health information, people may not be able to — in the future — obtain access to the identity of the sperm or ova donor, or may not be able to obtain appropriate medical information," he said.

But Lemmens added that the provinces have a role to play as well. So far, only Quebec has shown any interest.

It was Quebec that challenged the 2004 Assisted Human Reproduction Act on grounds that the federal government impeded on the province's jurisdiction over health care, and therefore its control over human reproductive technologies.

Quebec has also taken a lead in fully funding up to three in vitro fertility treatments for women.

With files from CBC's Susan Lunn