The author discusses the evolution and contemporary understanding of the concept of ‘deprivation of the ability to procreate’ in the context of Article 156 § 1 point 1 of the Criminal Code. She points to historical interpretations of this term and stresses that, in light of developments in medicine and current legal regulations – including the Act on the Treatment of Infertility – current medical knowledge should be taken into account. The main thesis boils down to the conclusion that deprivation of the ability to procreate does not occur when, despite the loss of the ability to conceive ‘naturally’, the ability to have biological offspring using modern methods of procreation is preserved. The article argues against the views previously widespread in doctrine, which also considered the loss of the ability to have sexual intercourse, give birth naturally or breastfeed a child to be a ‘loss of fertility’, pointing out that these views are inadequate in the light of current medical knowledge. It stresses that only actual infertility, i.e. the complete absence of any chance of having biological offspring, fulfills the criteria for serious damage to health in the form of deprivation of the ability to procreate, as provided for in Article 156 § 1(1) of the Criminal Code.