This house justifies commercial surrogacy

Gestational Surrogacy - Using IVF and Having a Surrogate Mother Carry the Child for You

What is surrogacy?

Surrogacy involves using one woman's uterus to implant and carry the embryo and deliver the baby for
another person or couple.

It is most often done utilizing IVF - in vitro fertilization, but is sometimes done with intrauterine
insemination.

The woman that carries the pregnancy is called the surrogate,

"surrogate mother" or "gestational carrier".

Who should be treated with gestational surrogacy?

It is often done for a woman who has had her uterus removed but
still has ovaries.

She can provide the egg to make a baby, but has no womb to carry it.

Using her eggs and in vitro fertilization technology, IVF, she can
utilize a surrogate mother to carry the pregnancy (her own genetic
child).

A surrogate is also sometimes used for cases where a young woman

has a medical condition that could result in serious health risks to the
mother or the baby.

It is also done sometimes in couples with recurrent IVF implantation failure.

o However, success is much more likely using IVF with donor eggs and the infertile woman's uterus
compared to using the infertile woman's eggs and a surrogate.

o Egg quality problems are common, but uterine problems are far less common.

How is gestational surrogacy performed?

1. An appropriate surrogate is chosen and thoroughly screened for infectious diseases.

2. Consents are signed by all parties. This is an important step in surrogacy cases. All potential issues need to be
carefully clarified, put in writing and signed.

3. The patient is stimulated for IVF with medications to develop multiple eggs.

4. The surrogate is placed on medications that suppress her own menstrual cycle and stimulate development of a
receptive uterine lining.

5. When the patient's follicles are mature, an egg retrieval procedure is performed to remove eggs from her
ovaries.

6. The eggs are fertilized in the laboratory with her partner's sperm.

7. The embryos develop in the laboratory for 3-5 days.

 8. Then, an embryo transfer procedure is done which places the embryos in the surrogate mother's uterus where
they will hopefully implant.

9. The surrogate delivers the baby.

10. The baby goes home from the hospital with the "genetic parents".

Pregnancy rates:

Success rates for surrogacy IVF procedures vary considerably.

The age of the woman providing the eggs is one critical factor.

In general, pregnancy rates are higher than with eggs from infertile women.

Some programs are reporting delivery rates of over 50% per transfer for gestational surrogacy cases (using
eggs from women under about age 37).

How to Become a Surrogate Mother

Preparing Yourself for Pregnancy

Find out if you are a good candidate for surrogacy. There are not established legal requirements for being a
surrogate, but most agencies have their own guidelines. In general, a woman must be between 21 and 45 years
old, be in good physical health, have a stable family life, and have had a previous pregnancy that did not result
in any complications in order to be considered a good candidate. [1]
Have a preconception checkup. Before you become pregnant, you should see your doctor to make sure that you are
healthy enough. Your doctor may perform a physical exam, perform blood tests, and ask you about your personal and
family history.[2]

If you have any chronic medical conditions or a history that cause you to develop complications during
pregnancy, your doctor will talk to you about the risks involved and what you can do to reduce them.

If you are on birth control, be sure to ask your doctor how long you need to stop the medication before you try
to become pregnant.

You may need to get vaccinated for certain diseases that could be dangerous to an unborn child, including
chickenpox and rubella.

You should also consider getting tested for sexually transmitted diseases, such as HIV and chlamydia. These
diseases can be harmful to an unborn baby, and may also result in pregnancy complications or fertility issues.
If you are working with a surrogacy agency, these tests will likely be required.

The intended parents may also be required to undergo certain screenings, including tests for diseases that may
be transmitted to you or to the child during pregnancy, as well as psychological and genetic screenings.
Have a psychological screening. If you are using a surrogacy agency, you will be required to undergo a psychological
evaluation to ensure that you do not have any underlying desire to keep the child. Even if you aren't required to talk to
someone about these issues, it is a good idea to do so for your own emotional well-being. [3]

It is very important that you understand how difficult it might be for you to part with a child that you carried
for nine months. Surrogacy is a controversial issue because some people do not believe that a surrogate
mother can truly give informed consent to give the baby up before it is born. [4]
Start taking prenatal vitamins. In order to provide the most benefit to the unborn child, you should start
taking prenatal vitamins that contain folic acid before you start trying to get pregnant. Folic acid is most
important to a fetus during the first few weeks of development, so if you wait until you know you are pregnant
to start taking the supplements, you may have already missed the most crucial window.[5]
Know the different types of surrogacy. There are two different kinds of surrogacy: traditional surrogacy (also known
as partial surrogacy or straight surrogacy), and gestational surrogacy (also known as full surrogacy or host surrogacy).
[6]

With traditional surrogacy, the surrogate mother is artificially inseminated using sperm donated by the
intended father, or in some cases by a sperm donor. The surrogate mother's own egg is fertilized, so she is the
child's biological mother. This can create lots of legal complications because in some areas, the surrogate
mother may be able to claim guardianship of the child based on the genetic link. [7]

With gestational surrogacy, the surrogate mother undergoes a procedure called in vitro fertilization (IVF),
during which an embryo that was created in a lab, using eggs and sperm either from the intended parents or
from donors, is implanted in her uterus. With gestational surrogacy, the surrogate mother is not genetically
related to the baby.

You can become a gestational surrogate for a close family member. You cannot become a traditional surrogate
if the intended father is a close relative of yours because this increases the risk that the child will have a
genetic disorder.
Understand the laws in your area. The laws regarding surrogacy are extremely complicated in the United States.
Because there is no federal law regarding surrogacy, each state has its own laws. In some states it is illegal to enter
into any kind of surrogacy agreement, and you may even go to jail for doing so. In other states, it is perfectly legal to
enter into a surrogacy agreement and to be compensated for doing so. [8]

Many states allow contracts for gestational surrogacy, but not for traditional surrogacy, due to the potential for
custody battles.

If you live in a state that does not recognize surrogacy agreements as legal, you may end up being legally
responsible for supporting the child, especially if the child was conceived using traditional surrogacy methods.

The laws in some states also require that the intended parents undergo formal adoption proceedings after the
child is born. In other states, legal guardianship can be established before the birth of the child. [9]
Decide if you will use an agency. If you choose to use a surrogacy agency, the agency will take care of matching you
with a couple who wants a child. If you want to become a surrogate mother to help someone you already know have a
child, you do not need to use an agency.[10]

It is also possible to arrange for a surrogacy agreement with a couple you don't know by answering or placing
an ad, but keep in mind that agencies screen all potential candidates, and you will not have this protection if
you do not use one.

You will need to fill out an application and undergo certain medical tests in order to be accepted by a
surrogacy agency. In some cases, the agency may have specific requirements for surrogate mothers beyond a
clean bill of health.

Whether you use an agency or not, it is very important that you trust the intended parents. You will have a
great deal of contact with them during your pregnancy, so it is important that they be supportive and reliable.

Make sure you look into the agency's background before signing any agreements. Not all agencies are
reputable.
Have your lawyer draft a contract. Because of all of the potential legal issues involved with surrogacy, it is
extremely important to have good legal representation throughout the entire process. Your lawyer should draft a
comprehensive contract that outlines the rights and responsibilities of all parties involved. This should be done before
you undergo any medical procedures.[11]

Make sure your contract addresses important issues such as the amount of compensation the surrogate mother
will receive, who will be responsible for paying medical bills, who will have custody of the child in the event
that something happens to the intended parents during the pregnancy, what will happen if the surrogate mother
gives birth to twins or triplets, what will happen if one party wants to terminate the pregnancy, and what will
happen in the event of a miscarriage. Your lawyer should advise you of any other issues that need to be
addressed in the contract.
 You should have your own lawyer, not the same one who represents the intended parents.

If you work with a surrogacy agency, they may take care of the contract for you. It is still a good idea to have
your own lawyer look it over before you sign it, just to make sure that you are fully protected.

Having a Surrogate Pregnancy

Visit a fertility doctor. Once you have undergone all of the necessary medical screenings and finalized your
surrogacy contract, you will need to undergo a procedure, either artificial insemination or in vitro fertilization,
to become pregnant. Both of these procedures involve the insertion of a thin catheter into the surrogate
mother's uterus, and are typically performed at fertility clinics. After the procedure, you will be required to
undergo tests to confirm if you are pregnant.

o Intrauterine insemination is the most effective type of artificial insemination because the sperm is
inserted directly into the uterus. This procedure is very quick and should not cause any pain. [12]

o You may be given a mild sedative for IVF. You shouldn't feel any pain, but it may be slightly
uncomfortable.[13]

o You may be required to take hormonal supplements prior to the procedure in order to increase the
likelihood that you will successfully become pregnant. [14]
Follow through with your obligations. The surrogacy contract will likely include clauses regarding your obligations
to maintain a healthy pregnancy. Make sure to attend all of your required doctor's appointments and follow your
doctor's recommendations for living a healthy lifestyle.

It is also very important to maintain a good, open relationship with the intended parents. They will likely want
to be very involved throughout your pregnancy.
Get the support you need. If you find that it is more difficult being a surrogate mother than you expected, don't be
afraid to talk about your feelings. Many surrogate mothers deal with complex emotions during their pregnancies, so
you are not alone.[15]

Confide in your spouse or partner, if you have one.

Attend support groups for surrogate mothers or seek out help online. These women will understand exactly
what you are going through.

See a counselor if necessary. Some surrogate mothers may need to seek professional help in order to cope with
the psychological difficulties involved in carrying someone else's child.

Types of surrogacy

Gestational surrogacy (GS)

A surrogate is implanted with an embryo created by IVF. The resulting child is genetically unrelated to the surrogate.
There are several sub-types of gestational surrogacy as noted below.

Gestational surrogacy with embryo from both intended parents (GS/IP)

A surrogate is implanted with an embryo created by IVF, using intended father's sperm and intended mother's eggs.

Gestational surrogacy and egg donation (GS/ED)

A surrogate is implanted with an embryo created by IVF, using intended father's sperm and a donor egg where the
donor is not the surrogate. The resulting child is genetically related to intended father and genetically unrelated to the
surrogate.

Gestational surrogacy and donor sperm (GS/DS)

A surrogate is implanted with an embryo created by IVF, using intended mother's egg and donor sperm. The resulting
child is genetically related to intended mother and genetically unrelated to the surrogate.
Gestational surrogacy and donor embryo (GS/DE)
A donor embryo is implanted in a surrogate; such embryos may be available when others undergoing IVF have
embryos left over, which they opt to donate to others. The resulting child is genetically unrelated to the intended
parent(s) and genetically unrelated to the surrogate.

Traditional surrogacy (TS)

This involves naturally[10] or artificially inseminating a surrogate with intended father's sperm via IUI, IVF or home
insemination. With this method, the resulting child is genetically related to intended father and genetically related to
the surrogate.

Traditional surrogacy and donor sperm (TS/DS)

A surrogate is artificially inseminated with donor sperm using ICI, IUI or IVF. An ICI insemination may be performed
privately by the parties without the intervention of a doctor or physician. The resulting child is genetically unrelated to
the intended parent(s) but is genetically related to the surrogate. In many jurisdictions, the 'commissioning parents'
will need to go through an adoption process in order to have legal rights in respect to the resulting child. Many fertility
centers which provide for surrogacy will assist the parties through this process.

Surrogacy centers
In places where surrogacy is legal, couples may enlist the help of a third party agency to oversee the process of finding
a surrogate, entering into a contract with her and recommend fertility centers for insemination, generally via IVF.
These agencies can help make sure that surrogates are screened with psych evaluations and other medical tests so as to
ensure healthy deliveries. They also usually facilitate all legal matters concerning the two parties (intended parents and
surrogate).

Some of the leading surrogacy centers in the U.S. include Circle Surrogacy, Grkuttttta center and ConceiveAbilities.

Legal issues
As of 2013, locations where a woman could legally be paid to carry another's child through IVF and embryo transfer
included India, Georgia, Russia, Thailand, Ukraine and a few U.S. states.[11]

The legal aspects of surrogacy in any particular jurisdiction tend to hinge on a few central questions:

Are surrogacy agreements enforceable, void or prohibited? Does it make a difference whether the surrogate
mother is paid (commercial) or simply reimbursed for expenses (altruistic)?

What, if any, difference does it make whether the surrogacy is traditional or gestational?

Is there an alternative to post-birth adoption for the recognition of the intended parents as the legal parents,
either before or after the birth?
Although laws differ widely from one jurisdiction to another, some generalizations are possible:

The historical legal assumption has been that the woman giving birth to a child is that child's legal mother, and the
only way for another woman to be recognized as the mother is through adoption (usually requiring the birth mother's
formal abandonment of parental rights).

Even in jurisdictions that do not recognize surrogacy arrangements, if the genetic parents and the birth mother proceed
without any intervention from the government and have no changes of heart along the way, they will likely be able to
achieve the effects of surrogacy by having the surrogate mother give birth and then give the child up for private
adoption to the intended parents.

If the jurisdiction specifically prohibits surrogacy, however, and finds out about the arrangement, there may be
financial and legal consequences for the parties involved. One jurisdiction (Quebec) prevented the genetic mother's
adoption of the child even though that left the child with no legal mother.[12]
Some jurisdictions specifically prohibit only commercial and not altruistic surrogacy. Even jurisdictions that do not
prohibit surrogacy may rule that surrogacy contracts (commercial, altruistic, or both) are void. If the contract is either
prohibited or void, then there is no recourse if one party to the agreement has a change of heart: If a surrogate changes
her mind and decides to keep the child, the intended mother has no claim to the child even if it is her genetic offspring,
and the couple cannot get back any money they may have paid or reimbursed to the surrogate; if the intended parents
change their mind and do not want the child after all, the surrogate cannot get any reimbursement for expenses, or any
promised payment, and she will be left with legal custody of the child.

Jurisdictions that permit surrogacy sometimes offer a way for the intended mother, especially if she is also the genetic
mother, to be recognized as the legal mother without going through the process of abandonment and adoption.

Often this is via a birth order[13] in which a court rules on the legal parentage of a child. These orders usually require
the consent of all parties involved, sometimes including even the husband of a married gestational surrogate. Most
jurisdictions provide for only a post-birth order, often out of an unwillingness to force the surrogate mother to give up
parental rights if she changes her mind after the birth.

A few jurisdictions do provide for pre-birth orders, generally in only those cases when the surrogate mother is not
genetically related to the expected child. Some jurisdictions impose other requirements in order to issue birth orders,
for example, that the intended parents be heterosexual and married to one another. Jurisdictions that provide for pre-
birth orders are also more likely to provide for some kind of enforcement of surrogacy contracts.

Surrogacy laws worldwide

Main article: Surrogacy laws by country

Australia
In all jurisdictions of Australia, altruistic surrogacy has been the only recently recognized surrogacy that has become
legal. However, in all states and the Australian Capital Territory arranging commercial surrogacy is a criminal offense,
although the Northern Territory has no legislation governing surrogacy at all and there are no plans to introduce laws
on surrogacy into the NT Legislative Assembly in the near future.[14] Moreover, New South Wales, Queensland and the
Australian Capital Territory have made it an offence for residents to enter into international commercial surrogacy
arrangements with potential penalties extending to imprisonment for up to one year in Australian Capital Territory, up
to two years imprisonment in New South Wales and up to three years imprisonment in Queensland.

In 2004, the Australian Capital Territory was the first jurisdiction within Australia to pass legislation to make only
altruistic surrogacy legal, under the Parentage Act 2004.

In 2006, Australian senator Stephen Conroy and his wife Paula Benson announced that they had arranged for a child to
be born through egg donation and gestational surrogacy. Unusually, Conroy was put on the birth certificate as the
father of the child. Previously, couples who used to make surrogacy arrangements in Australia had to adopt the child
after it was registered as born to the natural mother; rather than being recognized as birth parents, however now that
surrogacy is more regular practice for childless parents; most states have switched to such arrangements to give the
intended parents proper rights.[15][16] After the announcement, Victoria passed a law called the Assisted Reproductive
Treatment Act 2008, effective since 1/1/2010 to make only altruistic surrogacy legal. [17]

In 2009, both Western Australia and South Australia passed a law that allows altruistic surrogacy legal only for
couples of the opposite-sex only, and is banned for single people and same-sex couples, under the Surrogacy Act 2008
and the Family Relationships Act 1975 respectively.

In 2010, Queensland passed a law to make only altruistic surrogacy legal, under the Surrogacy Act 2010 No 2.[18] In
the same year New South Wales, under the Surrogacy Act 2010 No 102 passed a law to make only altruistic surrogacy
legal and in 2013, Tasmania also passed a law to make only altruistic surrogacy legal, under the Surrogacy Act No 34
and the Surrogacy (Consequential Amendments) Act No 31[19][19][20][21][22]
Canada
The Assisted Human Reproduction Act (AHRC) permits only altruistic surrogacy: surrogate mothers may be
reimbursed for approved expenses but payment of any other consideration or fee is illegal. [23] Quebec law, however,
does not recognize surrogacy arrangements, whether commercial or altruistic.

Ireland
There is no law in Ireland governing surrogacy. In 2005 a Government appointed Commission published a very
comprehensive report on Assisted Human Reproduction, which made many recommendations on the broader area of
assisted human reproduction. In relation to surrogacy it recommended that the commissioning couple would under
Irish law be regarded as the parents of the child. Despite the publication there has been no legislation published and
the area essentially remains unregulated. Due to mounting pressure from Irish citizens going abroad to have children
through surrogacy, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Defence published guidelines for them on 21 February 2012.
[24]

New Zealand
Main article: Surrogacy in New Zealand
Altruistic surrogacy is legal.

South Africa
The South Africa Children's Act of 2005 (which came fully into force in 2010) enabled the "commissioning parents"
and the surrogate to have their surrogacy agreement validated by the High Court even before fertilization. This allows
the commissioning parents to be recognized as legal parents from the outset of the process and helps prevent
uncertainty - although if the surrogate mother is the genetic mother she has until 60 days after the birth of the child to
change her mind. The law permits single people and gay couples to be commissioning parents. [25] However, only those
domiciled in South Africa benefit from the protection of the law, no non-validated agreements will be enforced, and
agreements must be altruistic rather than commercial. If there is only one commissioning parent, s/he must be
genetically related to the child. If there are two, they must both be genetically related to the child unless that is
physically impossible due to infertility or sex (as in the case of a same sex couple). The Commissioning parent or
parents must be physically unable to birth a child independently. The surrogate mother must have had at least one
pregnancy and viable delivery and have at least one living child. The surrogate mother has the right to unilaterally
terminate the pregnancy, but she must consult with and inform the commissioning parents, and if she is terminating for
a non-medical reason, may be obliged to refund any medical reimbursements she had received. [26]

United Kingdom
Commercial surrogacy arrangements are not legal in the United Kingdom. Such arrangements were prohibited by the
Surrogacy Arrangements Act 1985.[27] Whilst it is illegal in the UK to pay more than expenses for a surrogacy, the
relationship is recognised under section 30 of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990. Regardless of
contractual or financial consideration for expenses, surrogacy arrangements are not legally enforceable so a surrogate
mother maintains the legal right of determination for the child, even if they are genetically unrelated. Unless a parental
order or adoption order is made, the surrogate mother remains the legal mother of the child.

United States
Surrogacy and its attendant legal issues fall under state jurisdiction and the legal situation for surrogacy varies greatly
from state to state. Some states have written legislation, while others have developed common law regimes for dealing
with surrogacy issues. Some states facilitate surrogacy and surrogacy contracts, others simply refuse to enforce them,
and some penalize commercial surrogacy. Surrogacy friendly states tend to enforce both commercial and altruistic
surrogacy contracts and facilitate straightforward ways for the intended parents to be recognized as the child's legal
parents. Some relatively surrogacy friendly states only offer support for married heterosexual couples. Generally, only
gestational surrogacy is supported and traditional surrogacy finds little to no legal support.

States generally considered to be surrogacy friendly include California, [28] Illinois,[29] Arkansas,[30] Maryland,[31] and
New Hampshire[32] among others.
For legal purposes, key factors are where the contract is completed, where the surrogate mother resides, and where the
birth takes place. Therefore, individuals living in a non-friendly state can still benefit from the polices of surrogacy
friendly states by working with a surrogate who lives and will give birth in a friendly state.

Ethical issues
Ethical issues that have been raised with regards to surrogacy include: [33]

To what extent should society be concerned about exploitation, commodification, and/or coercion when
women are paid to be pregnant and deliver babies, especially in cases where there are large wealth and power
differentials between intended parents and surrogates?

To what extent is it right for society to permit women to make contracts about the use of their bodies?

o To what extent is it a woman's human right to make contracts regarding the use of her body?

o Is contracting for surrogacy more like contracting for employment/labor, or more like contracting for
prostitution, or more like contracting for slavery?

o Which, if any, of these kinds of contracts should be enforceable?

o Should the state be able to force a woman to carry out "specific performance" of her contract if that
requires her to give birth to an embryo she would like to abort, or to abort an embryo she would like
to carry to term?

What does motherhood mean?

o What is the relationship between genetic motherhood, gestational motherhood, and social
motherhood?

o Is it possible to socially or legally conceive of multiple modes of motherhood and/or the recognition
of multiple mothers?

Should a child born via surrogacy have the right to know the identity of any/all of the people involved in that
child's conception and delivery?

Religious issues
See also: Religious response to assisted reproductive technology
Different religions take different approaches to surrogacy, often related to their stances on assisted reproductive
technology in general.

Catholicism
Paragraph 2376 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church states that: "Techniques that entail the dissociation of
husband and wife, by the intrusion of a person other than the couple (donation of sperm or ovum, surrogate uterus),
are gravely immoral."[34]

Judaism
Jewish legal scholars debate this issue, some contend that parenthood is determined by the woman giving birth while
others opt to consider the genetic parents the legal parents, this is a hotly debated issue in recent years. [35][36] More
recently, Jewish religious establishments have accepted surrogacy only if it is full gestational surrogacy with both
intended parents' gametes included and fertilization done via IVF.[37]

Psychological concerns

Surrogate
The neutrality of this section is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove
this message until conditions to do so are met. (April 2011) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
A study by the Family and Child Psychology Research Centre at City University London in 2002 concluded that
surrogate mothers rarely had difficulty relinquishing rights to a surrogate child and that the intended mothers showed
greater warmth to the child than mothers conceiving naturally.[38][39][40]

Anthropological studies of surrogates have shown that surrogates engage in various distancing techniques throughout
the surrogate pregnancy so as to ensure that they do not become emotionally attached to the baby. [41][42] Many
surrogates intentionally try to foster the development of emotional attachment between the intended mother and the
surrogate child.[43]

Surrogates are generally encouraged by the agency they go through to become emotionally detached from the fetus
prior to giving birth.[44]

Instead of the popular expectation that surrogates feel traumatized after relinquishment, an overwhelming majority
describe feeling empowered by their surrogacy experience. [42][45]

Although surrogate mothers generally report being satisfied with their experience as surrogates there are cases in
which they are not. Unmet expectations are associated with dissatisfaction. Some women did not feel a certain level of
closeness with the couple and others did not feel respected by the couple. [46]

Some women experience emotional distress when participating as a surrogate mother. This could be due to a lack of
therapy and emotional support through the surrogate process. [46]

Some women have psychological reactions when being surrogate mothers. These include depression when
surrendering the child, grief, and even refusal to release the child. [47]

A 2011 study from the Centre for Family Research at the University of Cambridge found that surrogacy does not have
a negative impact on the surrogate's own children. [48]

Child
A recent study (involving 32 surrogacy, 32 egg donation, and 54 natural conception families) examined the impact of
surrogacy on motherchild relationships and children's psychological adjustment at age seven. Researchers found no
differences in negativity, maternal positivity, or child adjustment. [49]

Fertility tourism
Main article: Fertility tourism
Fertility tourism for surrogacy is driven by legal regulations in the home country, or lower price abroad.

India
Further information: Commercial surrogacy in India
India is a main destination for surrogacy. Indian surrogates have been increasingly popular with intended parents in
industrialized nations because of the relatively low cost. Indian clinics are at the same time becoming more
competitive, not just in the pricing, but in the hiring and retention of Indian females as surrogates. Clinics charge
patients between $10,000 and $28,000 for the complete package, including fertilization, the surrogate's fee, and
delivery of the baby at a hospital. Including the costs of flight tickets, medical procedures and hotels, it comes to
roughly a third of the price compared with going through the procedure in the UK. [50]

Surrogacy in India is of low cost and the laws are flexible. In 2008, the Supreme Court of India in the Manji's case
(Japanese Baby) has held that commercial surrogacy is permitted in India. That has again increased the international
confidence in going in for surrogacy in India. But as of 2014, a surrogacy ban was placed on homosexual couples and
single parents.

There is an upcoming Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill, aiming to regulate the surrogacy business. However, it
is expected to increase the confidence in clinics by sorting out dubious practitioners, and in this way stimulate the
practice.[50]
Commercial surrogacy is now illegal in India after a bill passed in AugustSeptember 2016

Russian Federation
Most Cases for surrogacy are usually Internal

Liberal legislation makes Russia attractive for "reproductive tourists" looking for techniques not available in their
countries. Intended parents come there for oocyte donation, because of advanced age or marital status (single women
and single men) and when surrogacy is considered. Gestational surrogacy, even commercial is absolutely legal in
Russia, being available for practically all adults willing to be parents. [51] Foreigners have the same rights as for assisted
reproduction as Russian citizens. Within three days after the birth the commissioning parents obtain a Russian birth
certificate with both their names on it. Genetic relation to the child (in case of donation) does not matter.[52] On August
4, 2010, a Moscow court ruled that a single man who applied for gestational surrogacy (using donor eggs) could be
registered as the only parent of his son, becoming the first man in Russia to defend his right to become a father
through a court procedure.[53] The surrogate mother's name was not listed on the birth certificate; the father was listed
as the only parent.

Ukraine
Surrogacy is completely legal in Ukraine. However, only healthy mothers who
have had children before can become surrogates. Surrogates in Ukraine have
zero parental rights over the child, as stated on Article 123 of the Family Code of
Ukraine. Thus, a surrogate cannot refuse to hand the baby over in the case she
changes her mind after birth. Only married couples can legally go through
gestational surrogacy in Ukraine.

United States

The United States is sought as a location for surrogate mothers by some

couples seeking a green card in the U.S., since the resulting child can get
birthright citizenship in the United States, and can thereby apply for
green cards for the parents when the child turns 21 years of age. [54]
However, this is not the main reason. People come to the US for
surrogacy procedures, including to enjoy a better quality of medical
technology and care, as well as the high level of legal protections
afforded through some US state courts to surrogacy contracts as
compared to other countries. Increasingly, homosexual couples who face
restrictions using IVF and surrogacy procedures in their home countries
travel to US states where it is legal.

Key aspects of the bills

1. The draft surrogacy Bill aims at regulating commissioning of surrogacy in the country in a proper manner.

2. As per the 2009 Law Commission Report, the artificial reproduction treatment industry is Rs. 25,000 crore industry.

3. The Bill aims to prevent exploitation of women, especially those in rural and tribal areas.

4. The Bill promises to ensure parentage of children born out of surrogacy is legal and transparent.

5. The new Bill proposes complete ban on commercial surrogacy.

6. As per the Bill, only legally-wedded Indian couples can have children through surrogacy, provided at least one of
them have been proven to have fertility-related issues.

7. Foreigners, even Overseas Indians, are barred from commissioning surrogacy.

8. A woman will be allowed to become a surrogate mother only for altruistic purpose and under no circumstances
money shall be paid to her, except for medical expenses.

9. Unmarried couples, single parents, live-in partners and homosexuals cannot opt for surrogacy as per the new bill.

10. Surrogacy regulation board will be set-up at Central and State-level.

11. The Bill also prohibits couples who already have biological or adopted children from commissioning babies
through surrogacy.

12. The Bill also bars foreigners, homosexual couples, people in live-in relationships and single individuals, making
only childless, straight Indian couple married for a minimum of five years eligible for surrogacy.

13. Eligible couples will have to turn to close relatives, not necessarily related by blood for altruistic surrogacy
where no money exchanges hands between the commissioning couple and the surrogate mother.

So I will favor this bill because

I don't want India as a surrogacy capital.

I don't want India as a capital of divorce.

I don't want Celebrities like Shah Rukh Khan and Aamir Khan, who had children by way of surrogacy
because he had so much money.

I don't want women loose his live because health recovery is tough.

I don't want rich people outsource pregnancies to poorer women because their wives cannot go through labour
pain.

I want to prevent exploitation of women, especially those in rural and tribal areas

Why has government of India introduced Surrogacy bill? What are its proposals?
Can We Please Ask The Right Questions Against The Flawed Surrogacy Bill, 2016?

The Surrogacy Bill, 2016 has been in making for a decade now. It was drafted in a number of ways but it is only
now that the draft has been finally tabled and guess what? This one probably is the worst of the lot.

Surrogacy Bill, 2016

Flaws and unjust bans is what sums up the cabinet approved Surrogacy Bill, 2016 which will be presented in
Parliament for approval in the next session.

Instead of understanding and addressing the issues which need to be regulated, the newly tabled Bill seeks to impose
bans which will kill the fertility treatment.

For the longest of times surrogacy industry has flourished in India but from what it looks, the bill is just going to end it
all.

The Bill allows altruistic surrogacy for a limited section of society. Only childless, heterosexual Indian couples who
have been married for five years and are living in India can now avail of fertility treatment. And if they need to find a
surrogate to carry the baby, they have to seek out a relative who will do it out of altruism.

With this sweeping ban, the Bill negates the rights of parenthood to single persons, divorcees, widowed persons, same
sex couples, live-in relationship partners and others who come outside the patriarchal norm.
Questions That Need to be Addressed:

What about the rights of the above mentioned sections of the society? And what if one cannot find a suitable
person? And these bans have been taken to prevent the women in the industry from exploitation? Ever heard
that women are exploited and forced into doing something by their own families the most than anyone else?

Do you think a sister-in-law have much say when she is approached to be a surrogate mother? Even it would
be against her wishes, shell be forced to go ahead with it.

And what about the women who were the sole bread earning member of the family depending on the industry
for 2 square meals a day?

If the foetus is discovered to have a problem, what happens if the surrogate mother decides she does not want
an abortion for religious or emotional reasons? Will the parents, who are compelled by law to not abandon
the child, born out of a surrogacy procedure, under any circumstances, find themselves capable of taking care
of the child?

What if the surrogacy results in a girl child and the adoptive parents want an abortion? Will, given the
circumstances in India, the surrogate mother have a choice?

Oh, and heres the reason why live-in and homosexual couples cannot opt for surrogacy. We dont recognise
homosexuality and live-in relationships. It is against our ethos.

Whose ethos and what are these ethos that we are talking about? Because if the we in the statement refers to
the public opinion, we do recognise it.

As for those who fit within the Indian governments carefully defined outline, you cant opt for altruistic
surrogacy if you have a biological or adopted child, unless your child is mentally or physically challenged or
suffers from a life-threatening disorder or fatal illness.

So, basically the bill says Well decide if you can have a child; otherwise, of course, you are free to adopt.?

And some might say that adoption is a solution? There are thousands of children who might need a home, but
isnt adoption supposed to be a personal choice?

And why is it that the bill just talks about imposing bans and not regulation of the industry?

Why does the bill blatantly ignore the commercial surrogate mothers and the reason why they rent out their
womb? I mean is the bill really aimed at saving women from the exploitation?

The bill is somehow effecting everyone but the affected. Just bans, bans and bans. Wheres the improvement
or betterment of the people?
Seeing the bill in light of these questions, what can be inferred is only those with a proper understanding of the
entire process can bring in legislation which is pertinent, meaningful and seeks to nurture rather than kill.

And isnt that the only thing what we demand of such a legislation?

If the bill gets approved in the Parliament, a step aimed at saving a few will definitely be unjust for a larger part of
the population in the country!

97 Views View Upvotes

According to the Bill -

Commercial surrogacy is banned. Commercial surrogacy basically refers to an arrangement where a surrogate
mother is paid to give carry a child in her womb. Conversely, altruistic surrogacy is, as the name suggests -
unselfish. No one gets paid. The surrogate mother carries the baby as a favor and not as a payable service.
 A woman is allowed to be a surrogate mother only once in her lifetime.

Only heterosexual couple married for at least 5 years, with proven infertilty, are allowed to go for surrogacy if
they do not have any children of their own (natural or adopted). This provision prohibits homosexual couples,
live-in couples and single people from having children by surrogacy.

Only resident Indians are allowed to have children in India through surrogacy.(Thus excluding foreign
nationals and NRIs).

The Bill proposes a national regulator for all hospitals and clinics that allow surrogacy.

Affirmative
Circle Surrogacy, LTD.
200 High Street, Suite 600
Boston, MA 02110
(617) 439-9900

Staff in NYC, Los Angeles, Illinois, Texas, Florida, No. Carolina, Utah, Colorado, Utah, the UK, and Sweden

Reproductive infertility has always put unwanted pressure on couples, causing them much anxiety. The poor also
have a dream to live a happy life without the burden of poverty.

Becoming a surrogate empowers women with a sense of worth and authority. Surrogates could actually help
liberate women. Domestic labour should be paid, so when reproduction and pregnancy becomes a job, we will
look at the value of female labour in a new light.

YES: Nayna Patel is the medical director at Akanksha IVF Clinic, Anand, Gujarat, India. More than 825 surrogate
babies have been born at her clinic. Her work has been featured on the Oprah Winfrey Show and on the BBC. She
runs the Anand Surrogate Trust for the benefit of the surrogates and their families.

This would elevate womens status in a patriarchal capitalist society. They have the right to fulfil their dreams
not by doing anything wrong or immoral but by giving the greatest gift, which is creating a famil

n order to perpetuate survival on this planet, nature has given us two most powerful instincts, the instinct of self-
preservation and the instinct of reproduction. So, if a woman wants to get rid of her poverty by doing the noblest
deed, I firmly reiterate, surrogacy is a legitimate way of doing it.

For singles and couples who cant naturally conceive and carry a baby to term, surrogacy is sometimes considered
an option to have a child. Current laws across Australia permit altruistic surrogacy which prohibit the exchange
of funds for surrogacy, beyond reasonable expenses, in order to protect the woman and child involved.

I completely agree with Surrogate motherhood

I think that surrogate mothers should be allowed because if somebody can't have children they should still be able
to raise a family of their own. To some people, having the same DNA as your child is very important. I believe that
if someone is willing to be a surrogate mother to help somebody out, they should be able to. Also, gay people
aren't able to have a baby with both of their DNA, so it would be nice to at least have one of the partners genes,
and have the other legally adopt the child. If someone doesn't think they would be able to give away the baby after
giving birth to them, they shouldn't of signed the contract, although there are now laws and they would have to
give up the child to the other family.

I believe surrogate motherhood should be allowed

I think surrogate motherhood should be allowed. It's giving a mother a chance to have a child that is biological to
her, because she can't herself. Every woman should be given the chance to have her own child, just because she
physically isn't able to shouldn't keep her away from being a parent. Yes, a woman can adopt a child, but some
may want to be biological to a child and they should have that option. Genetically having a child that you've
wanted would be a lot better then having one that isn't. Just because someone else is having the child for you
doesn't mean it won't be loved as much, it will be loved even more because it's giving a woman a child that she
couldn't have by herself. It isn't about the money, it's about giving the gift of love to a person who can't do that on
their own. This is why surrogate motherhood should be allowed.

I have a child through surrogacy!

Without surrogacy I would not have experienced the joys of parenthood. Unless you are in the terrible predicament
of not being able to carry your own child you can never understand. We are in the UK and the surrogate mother
cannot be paid here: so it is far from a money making business. To top it all off we are a same sex male couple and
without surrogacy we'd never achieve this dream.

It should definitely be allowed!

Many couples have the issue of being unable to bear children. Gay couples, couples with health issues, even rich
couples that just don't want to go through the birth process should be able to sign up for surrogacy. This seems a
perfectly reasonable option and for women who NEED money AND fully consent to what they are signing up for,
they can get paid large sums of money and make a couple very happy!

Surrogate motherhood is a valuable option for parents who cannot bear children, and a good source of
income.
The world is full of couples who want desperately to be parents, but cannot, for physical health reasons, as well as
women who are healthy and capable of childbearing, but in need of some extra income. Surrogate motherhood is a
great way to solve both problems at once. Especially in a time of high unemployment, it could be a life-saver for
some people.

Yes, because if a woman can choose to kill an inconvenient child, then why not make a loved one?
If a woman has a choice of when and how she has children, then she has the right to make children she wants and
can afford. We allow women to terminate pregnancies that are unwanted. We allow them to give away unwanted
children through adoption. If a woman can choose to kill an inconvenient child, why not make a loved one? Why
not allow a willing woman to carry her sterile sister's child? Why not allow an older woman to carry her infertile
daughter's baby? As long as all parties consent, voluntary surrogacy is as much a woman's choice as abortion.
Until there are viable and successful artificial wombs, surrogate motherhood is the only option for a biological
family unit's creation in some cases. Why deny them that choice, when killing unwanted children is allowed?

Surrogate motherhood should absolutely be allowed, because what women choose to do with their
bodies is their own business.
What women choose to do with their bodies is their own personal business. Surrogate motherhood makes it
possible for women who can't have children of their own to choose who they would like to carry their child. And if
two consenting women come to the decision that this is the best option for them, it's no one's place to tell them
they can't. Surrogate motherhood doesn't hurt anyone, and there is no reason to disallow it.

At least it shouldn't be banned by a law

There are a lot of parents who can't have a child despite their eagerness to have children.
If the desire who want to have a children and who want to be a surrogate mother can be matched, it's a wonderful
thing. I do know there is a lot of people who can't embrace the idea of the surrogate motherhood, but also there is a
lot of people who support the idea. People who don't want to do this thing or don't want to be a surrogate mother,
just don't do or be. I think it's a sad thing that to make void the goodwill that want to support the couples who can't
have babies.

I believe that it is the right thing to do.

I feel this way because if you look at it this way, if you can't have a child and you really wanted one, you could use
a surrogate and they will be delighted to give you their child because they want to help you be happy in life. From
my experience, using a surrogate was delighting because they knew what I needed in my life to be happy. They
will help you with the child. That is the reason I think that people that cannot have kids should use a surrogate.

I am hoping to have a child through surrogacy

In response to Trainlock's comments about the number of unwanted children; in an ideal world all of us parents
who cannot conceive or carry a child to full term would be approved for adoption and take care of one of those
children, but sadly not everyone is approved and it can take years before you are told you are not approved.
Alternatively even if you are approved you can go before the matching panel, be told you are due to be matched
but more than 1 set of parents can be lined up as possible parents.....yet again you can fall at the final hurdle when
the other couple are chosen over you. There is only so much heartache a person can take. Surrogacy, although it is
a journey that needs a lot of research, I feel is a better option for us personally. It is very important to make sure all
aspects of the journey have been discussed, particularly the emotional side and the welfare of the surrogate Mum
is paramount while she is carrying the baby. Please not this is not intended as a retort to Trainlock's comment, just
my own personal opinion.

Surrogacy can be defined as situation where parents unable to give birth to a child due to Biological circumstances
(Infertility), turn to other women who are ready to give birth to a child for them for free or a sum of money. The
situation involving a sum paid to the surrogate mother can be defined as Commercial Surrogacy. The condition
where the surrogate mother offers her baby for free to the parents desiring it is called Altruistic Surrogacy.

Despite its influence on the modern society and the growing number of countries seeking to legalize this process,
it has been met with criticism from all around the globe. On one hand, it has been a great aid to those of the
infertile and single parents, however, it has also been a major blockade in the modernization of the world and the
Diplomacy of various countries. It has been in the spotlight for a few decades but no one could give a legal stand
for Surrogacy and many countries did not have any proposed laws and thus, evolved into a rampant cause for
concern around the globe if we were indeed striving towards basic human rights for each and every one, and of
equal social statuses. For this, we would focus on India which has the highest surrogacy rates because it is the
most cost-effective and logical place to find a surrogate whereby more than 320 million of its population live in
Extreme Poverty. We do not want India to become an interstate and international marketplace for commercial
Surrogacy.

I would like to go against commercial surrogacy and would like to here some of the Proposition Points from
discussions that are going to be held. I would appreciate it if the points and discussion would pop out soon

I want to start by saying, good job on the definitions.

I believe that surrogacy should be legal. There is no reason why it shouldn't be.

From an ethical stand point, many people argue that surrogacy is unethical as it is like prostitution. They sell their
body for money. However, this is a victimless crime. Both parties have everything to gain, and nothing to lose in
this situation (unless something unfortunate like a childbirth complication). One is willing to spend the money to
have a child in which they will love and cherish, the other need the money in order to support their life. Many may
think that prostitution/surrogacy exploits children and women. They are right, in some cases. These cases being
that the children and women are in an unregulated, therefore, criminal environment. If surrogacy is to be legal, it
needs to be regulated and controlled by government and civilian organizations much like a hospital, clinic, or
pharmacy is controlled. When was the last time you've seen someone peddling aspirin at a street corner? This goes
same with prostitution, if legalization and regulation was in place, there would be much less human trafficking,
violence and social abuse involved.

Many people believe that this is too intrusive to the reproductive capabilities of women, and these capabilities
should not be used as "physical labour" or "production". Furthermore, they believe that this will turn babies into
commodities. I first ask these people, why is sperm donation legal? Countries that have negatively regulated sperm
donation have seen extreme shortage and long waiting lists which shows that there is a market there. Sweden has
an 18 month waiting list and many travels to the less regulated Denmark for insemination. Korea suffers from a
shortage because each donor may only help giving rise to a child to one single couple. Canada prohibits payment
for gamete donation beyond the reimbursement of expenses, and has to import sperm from USA. Isn't it more
economically and socially sound for a country to allow surrogacy and sperm donation in their own country in
order to keep up with their own regulation, which will satisfy their own citizens, and keep "jobs" inside their own
country without "labour drain" and "outsourcing"?

Another argument against surrogacy is that Earth is overpopulated and that there are a lot of orphans, adoption is
the choice to go. This is a non-point because Earths overpopulation has nothing to do with surrogacy or artificial
insemination. This argument is actually harmful to society because it puts an pressure on parents to adopt rather
than lovingly make their own (as nature intended). If anyone has undergo an adoption process, it is not as easy as
it seems. Furthermore, many of these child who need loving bring horror stories of their own. I'm not saying all
orphans are evil little masterminds that will tear open a household, but the headache and heartache of an adoption
is often not worth it for the average home.

My last and most important point, its the surrogate mother's choice and freedom. And honestly? It's none of our
business to say if its morally or ethically correct or not as long as it is regulated and overseen so that there is no
victims.

Because of this prohibition on compensated surrogacy within Australia, hundreds of couples go overseas every
year to engage the services of a surrogate. This is true even in Queensland, New South Wales and the ACT, where
it is a criminal offence to enter into a compensated surrogacy arrangement overseas.

These laws are clearly an abject failure. They are not deterring people from heading offshore to engage in
surrogacy. There has not been a single prosecution, let alone a conviction, for pursuing extra-territorial surrogacy.

I think commercial surrogacy should be regulated, not banned.

There is no law governing Surrogacy presently. The ART Bill has an entire chapter regulating commercial
surrogacy and most surrogacy agreements follow the guidelines mentioned in the bill.

Remember that ART Bill is also pending and isnt passed yet.

Why regulation -

Surrogacy needs to be regulated because the Surrogates who are desperate women wanting to earn some money
through surrogacy get the worst deal.

To give certain examples -

Sometimes the surrogates are duped and they do not get their entire payment after the delivery of the child.

Sometimes, the surrogates have died and since there was no clause of compensation in the contract, their kin have
been forced to file suits to get compensation.
Sometimes, the commissioning couple gets divorced or simply change their mind and there are lawsuits.

There are numerous such legal complications that arise where surrogacy is not regulated.

Hence Regulation is much needed.

This is an altruism with sanskari twist.

Ironic that Government chose Janmashtami to ban surrogacy. Balram was born out of surrogacy, transfer from
Devaki's to Rohini's womb.

I dont completely agree with the Surrogacy Bill , especially the part that pertains to the ban on singles, those from
LGBT Community and those in a live-in partnership from experiencing parenthood through surrogacy. The
Government of India in its infinite wisdom decided not to address the issue of commercial surrogacy and has let
too many loose ends.

The Surrogacy Bill cleared by the Union cabinet has let too may loose ends. There are a number of reasons why
the Surrogacy Bill 2016 banning commercial surrogacy and regulating altruistic surrogacy in India is a lost
opportunity and an exercise in moral crusading.

Why discriminate against unmarried people, gays, NRIs ?

Why should a woman who undergoes pregnancy and possible medical complications get no
compensation ?

What will couples who cannot find a volunteer surrogate within its family ?

What about the privacy of the surrogate mother if her details are circulated to the clinics across the
country to make sure she wont surrogate for second time ?

I also see a lacuna in the Bill since it applies to all Indian states with the exception of Jammu and
Kashmir. What will prevent those who are denied surrogacy elsewhere from seeking it in J&K?

1. Black Market for Surrogacy

As an Economist once told , the only purpose bans serve in an economy are to push things into the black market
which will be worse. It turns an blind eye to the fact that demand for surrogacy still exists in India. Surrogacy will
continue - India's thriving black market economies will create ways to dub healthy couples as infertile, and
surrogates as relatives - it will just not provide the government with any data, or any ability to regulate it. It fears
me that in its propensity to ignore social realities , the bill will in effect will drive the entire surrogacy industry
underground.

2 . Altruism Doesnt prevent surrogate.

The USP of the present situation has been the fact that once a surrogate mother has been paid her dues and she has
delivered the baby, the commissioning parents can keep her out of their lives for good.There is neveer any
question of bondind between the child and its birth mother because the two hardly get any time together. But the
bill proposed insistence on altruistic surrogacy only through close relatives ensures that the child and its birth
mother remain in the same sphere all their lives - a complex situation that is fraught with ethical and emotional
dilemmas.

3. Ethics and Celebrity Bashing

In country where motherhood is social presssure as it is joy, the Bill fails to understand the motivations of
commissioning parents.

Kiran Rao, the first and most famous case of surrogacy in Bollywood, suffered miscarriages and surrogacy
provided a way out.

Gauri Khan's medical issues are not publicly known, but as a woman of 45 who wanted a child - and by all
accounts Shah Rukh Khan and Gauri are not irresponsible parents - who is the country to judge what joy that child
brought to their marriage?

Calling out Celebrities who seek parenthood should not be subject to political and social shaming for their choices
and was totally uncalled from Sushma Swaraj.

4. What about live-in relationships and those from LGBT Community?

Surrogacy for homosexual couples "doesnt go with our ethos", said Sushma Swaraj

Who are they to decide out the ethics of people ? What has one sexual orientation or number of years in marriage
to do with his/her decision to have a family ? Exactly what she meant by "ethical surrogacy" hasn't been clarified
yet, but as far as "altruistic surrogacy" is concerned, it's like a Karan Johar movie, that is all in the family.

Just last year the Supreme Court ruled that in "modern times, live-in relationship has become an acceptable norm.
It is not a crime." The Court has been quite clear what it thinks about live-in relationships.

The anger is justified. With Article 377 and now the Surrogacy Bill, India seems to be sending a message, loud
and clear, that homosexuals are not welcome here. The cultural prejudices were bad enough, and now the state
seems to be backing them.

The urge for a child cannot be subject to the moral judgement of politics and society. What it does need is a safe,
regulated, legally binding environment and framework in which individual choices may be made. Hope this bill is
turned down in Parliament and SENSE prevails over SANSKAR.

The Surrogacy Regulation Bill, 2016, seeking to regulate surrogacy in India, will fall short of doing so. In this
answer I have tried to explain why. (For some context on the need for regulation, Ive covered how surrogacy
works in India right now, at the end of the answer)

Firstly, the bill bans commercial surrogacy. If commercial surrogacy is banned, the women, who are desperate
enough to act as surrogate mothers, will be at a further disadvantage than if the industry were above ground and
regulated. The rationale for banning commercial surrogacy was to prevent women from selling their wombs, and
the Bill, if enacted, will push women to give away their wombs, under despicable and harsh conditions, in
seedy clinics.

Anything banned has a manner of being run aground and thriving anyway. Remember when sex-
determination of an unborn child was banned? It happens anyway. Remember when the government tried to ban
pornography? They couldnt. Comment on banning commercial surrogacy is redundant.

Secondly, the bill proposes altruistic surrogacy as the only way forward (and that too, only for couples who have
been married for five years (why not 3.5?), are unable to conceive children, or have mentally or physically
disabled children (this last detail is, in many ways, demeaning to the Persons with Disabilities, but who is
listening..)). Why, though?
If the object of the bill was to protect women from exploitation arising from such surrogacy arrangements, how
does non-payment for the same result in non-exploitation? If anything, payment of money is a mark of lesser
exploitation. To define exploitation dependent on exchange of money is a myopic way of looking at the social
reality. Exploitation through emotional stress is apparently not of any consequence. Whats the guarantee that
the altruistic surrogate mother is not being forced, coerced into bearing a child (over and above not being
compensated)?

Anyway, the assumption of the bill is that a relative who gives birth to the child, will forsake all relations with
the child and watch the baby grow from a distance? You know whats a good script for a soap opera? This.
Normally, Indian families are not structured to admit a mom and super mom to a child. Its better to have a
certain amount of anonymity in such procedures.

At a more fundamental level, if commercial surrogacy is being banned because womens bodies should not be
used as a build-operate-transfer for babies, then why is altruistic surrogacy any different? In both cases, the
woman's reproductive role is the only one that's recognized and in both cases; and at least in one of the case, the
woman's full consent can be assured legally through an agreement which can be enforced.

Thirdly, it is flawed when looked at through a prism of the Constitution of India, and hence will fail the test of
judicial review:

Any law that seeks to treat equals differently should justify the same. Else, it will not be constitutionally viable,
and will be deemed void by the courts. How is it justified to discriminate against single parents, NRI couples, live-
in couples, LGBTQ parents? There should be a rational nexus between object of the bill and the means thus
employed through such discrimination is there a rational nexus between preventing a certain kind of couple from
having a child from surrogacy and the prevention of exploitation of women? I can't fathom what the relationship
can be. Quite unreasonable to deny them equal rights, in my opinion.

No comment required on the arbitrary criterion for couples to qualify for surrogacy - 5 years of being married, of
being an Indian national and resident, with no children or a disabled child. Why only 5 years, why not 6 or 4?
Also, whats the use of this qualification? How does this qualification tangibly help the surrogate mother or the
child so born from the procedure?

Fourthly, the bills stated principle about Indian ethos and sanskari is in contradiction with that of the Juvenile
Justice (Care and Protection) Act, which allows single parents, NRIs to adopt a child. If a person/people is/are
capable (according to the Indian ethos) of taking care of an adopted child, why cant she take care of a child from
a surrogacy procedure?

Post Script: Three kudos to the Indian ethos that prevents homosexuals the right to parenthood. I await a time
when the Right to equality and Right against discrimination is extended to people not only of any gender, but also
to people of all sexualities.

What as the need for the bill? It seeks to regulate surrogacy in India, because it is currently in a despicable state.

Here are some facts on how the Surrogacy industry works in India:

The commissioning parents (rich people willing to pay for a baby) pay the medical expenses to the
surrogate mother (the one who carries the baby to term) and may also pay her an extra sum for her
services (an average of 2lakh rupees or more).
 The agreements are often not enforced. Even if payment is assured, it is not paid; sometimes even if it is
paid, the clinic that conducts the procedure will swallow some of it as a commission.

Some agreements can even be as evil as keep the mother alive and have her bear the baby to term,
irrespective of the threat to her life, and so women in such procedures can also lose their lives.

So as long as the demand for money, child and commission, from the surrogate poor mother, rich commissioning
parents, and clinics respectively remains, the industry will continue to live on, unabated. A law that bans it will
fail, unfortunately.

Negative
The surrogacy debate started in India in 2008, when two-week-old Baby Manji Yamada was left stateless after the
commissioning parents in Japan divorced during the pregnancy and the commissioning mother refused to accept
the baby.

In 2002, India became the first country to legalise commercial surrogacy. By 2012, India had become the
surrogacy capital of the world with surrogacy tourism valued at approximately $500 million annually by a paper
written by advocate Amil Malhotra titled, All aboard for the fertility express.

It's not right

I feel these women were not able to conceive for a reason. I guess survival of the fittest has gone out the window.
We are ruining the future of our species and while we may not see the effects today the consequences of practices
such as these will soon make themselves present.

Surrogacy leads to a entire minefield of issues

Firstly, surrogacy affirms the argument that children are made commodities by artificial means. No one can deny
the pains of infertility, but surrogacy makes having a child seem as like picking a product. By bearing a child, one
develops obvious emotional connection to it, and this early love for a child cannot be easily substituted. I believe
that if one is to take into account the child's well being, surrogacy can ensure a lack of early intimacy between
mother and child. Legally also surrogacy complicates rights over the child, which also affirms the view of child
commodification. A child is not something that should ever be fought over, but brought up in a loving and
nurturing environment. I don't deny however the reality that one does not have to give birth to or show any
relation to a child to be a great parent. It is the room for complication that steers me from surrogacy.

Women are not commodities to be bought and used

A women is made to bond with the baby that grows inside her, any women who does not bond with a child that is
inside her for 9 months or longer is mentally ill and is not able to enter into a legal contract. The child that she has
growing in her also suffers for the lack of this connection. It's child abuse to do so. Many instances of hetro
women who don't bond with their children in the womb and they have had to seek help.

The reason is Love

If I was the child of a surrogate mother, I would feel sad that my life began as a result of my mother accepting
money rather than a loving act between committed partners. Life should begin as an act of love not greed or need
for money.
I support adopting, through adoption a loving couple can give love to a child who may have otherwise never
experienced that in their childhood.

It is bad emotionally.
The surrogate mother will be attracted to the baby, so she would not in many cases want to give the baby back to
the real mother. Also it costs a lot. It will be bad for the babies of the surrogate mother because they will be jealous
and she won't have enough time to take care of them.

Human beings cannot be bought and sold

No woman should sign over her baby before it is born. She has no idea how she will feel about giving that baby up
before she has given birth to it. The baby has the right to know its mother. If I tried to sell my child I would be
arrested. We should not trade in human beings and even when surrogacy is done altruistically it is wrong

While there are some advantages of surrogate motherhood, I think we should focus on taking care of all
the children who are already here, and not able to enjoy the benefits of being part of a family.
On the surface, surrogate motherhood seems harmless. However, given the world's population, and the number of
children who are unwanted, abused, or otherwise unable to live a healthy, happy life due to their circumstances, I
feel it would be far better to focus on making those children's lives better. For infertile couples, I believe adoption
of children who will otherwise not have parents is a far better solution that will not result in even more population
growth.

No, because there are already far too many unfortunate children that could highly benefit from being
adopted by infertile couples.
I think it's awful to find ways to trick Mother Nature into passing defective genes, child could end up having the
same infertility complications as the biological parents for what it's worth. I would never agree to have a zygote
with foreign genes that have absolutely nothing to do with me be implanted inside my uterus, even if I needed the
money. I think its sick and twisted and goes against the laws of nature. Human beings come up with the craziest
things and have to use emotion to justify their actions. The parents are selfish, they will do whatever it takes to
have their children physically look like them. They can't find it in their hearts to love an adopted child from a third
world country/poor family. They have to bring another woman into this who probably needs the money but it's
going to leave an impact on her. Money can't buy you sanity.

No, it is harmful to the psyche of the woman impregnated with the child of another couple.
Surrogate carriers can experience negative psychological affects because the baby they are carrying doesn't belong
to them and it is no small sacrifice to bear a child in your belly for 9 whole months. Naturally a woman will start
to develop an attachment to that child. Another issue is the fact that the child is being separated from the loving
lady who carried it the 9 months before their birth. That can't be good for the baby who will grow up to find out
their mother never conceived them. Other issues concerning the surrogate mother's access to the child can come
into play. And if they are denied access/parental rights because it is not their child then that can destroy a woman's
mental state. The woman bearing the child will also experience negative physical effects and the pregnancy will
not be easily forgotten when her body will not return to the shape it was before the pregnancy. This is no small
issue.

Think of the children...

Sure it may seem like a good thing, helping families who can't have children to have children, but doesn't anyone
even think about the children? There are plenty of testimonies by donor-conceived children, including surrogacy,
who talk about confusion, stress, psychological/emotional issues resulting from their learning of the circumstances
that led to their birth... Adults need to stop being so selfish about having children, wanting family, especially if it's
at the expense of the children.

Ban on commercial surrogacy continues

A Federal government inquiry has recommended the ban on commercial surrogacy continue, which was one of the
key arguments of a submission from the Diocese of Sydney. 18th May 2016
It commodifies children. Second, it exploits financially needy women, who may engage in surrogacy for profit
when they would not do so otherwise. the submission said. Such concerns are evident in developing countries
involved in the international surrogacy trade. The socio-economic disparity between commissioning parents and
surrogates is often great, leading to unequal bargaining power between the two, and reports of unfair and
dangerous treatment of vulnerable women in some overseas countries.

The Social Issues Committee argued that a harm minimisation approach in developed countries had not resolved
ethical issues, such as disputes arising when a surrogate wanted to withdraw from a commercial contract.

The Parliamentary report agreed that Australias ban on commercial surrogacy should remain in place but said
State and Federal governments should work together to develop a model national law that facilitates non-
commercial or altruistic surrogacy in Australia.

It said the law should ensure the best interests of the child should be protected (including the childs safety and
well-being and right to know about their origins), the surrogate mother should make a free and informed decision
about whether to act as a surrogate, and that there be legal clarity about the parent-child relationships that result
from the arrangement.

The Diocese of Sydney submission began with a major statement on marriage, parenthood and the sanctity of
human life.

Marriage (lifelong commitment between a man and woman) is the ideal foundation for a family, whereby through
the act of sexual intercourse, the child is conceived by a mother and begotten by a father, creating continuity
between biological and social roles. While the vicissitudes of life can prevent this ideal from being realised, we
nonetheless believe this should be the aim in the creation of new families.

The submission said We believe that parenthood is a blessing, not a right, and that children are not commodities
to be commissioned at will.

Further, it said, We believe that human life begins at fertilisation (joining of the male and female gametes) and
that it should be respected from that time onwards.

The Diocese of Sydney submission supported developing the regulatory regime of State and Federal governments
in non-commercial surrogacy, as well as legal clarity and the paramount role of the welfare of the child.

We object to surrogacy arrangements that prioritise the preferences of commissioning parents, as this promotes
the model of offspring as commodity. the diocesan submission said.

Our view of the value of the human embryo leads us to support the transfer to a uterus of all embryos created
through ART (Assisted Reproductive Technologies). Once a child is conceived, their life should be preserved
regardless of a change of preferences by the adults involved."

Reflecting recent controversies over international and third world surrogacy arrangements, the Social Issues
Committee urged that commissioning parents should not be able to withdraw their intention to parent, once a
surrogate is pregnant.

We believe this should be an absolute responsibility, regardless of any unexpected events such as multiple
pregnancy and/or detection of abnormality in the child. The risk of this occurring is real, as illustrated by the
much-publicised example of Baby Gammy in 2014.

The submission said that if the surrogate is unwilling to retain parenthood of the child, the commissioning parents
should be legally and financially responsible for the ongoing nurture of any children born until they reach
adulthood.

Can Surrogacy be Ethical?

Ever since the upsetting story of Baby Gammy came to light - a baby boy abandoned in Thailand by his
commissioning parents because he was born with Down Syndrome - the pro-surrogacy lobby in Australia has been
very busy.

Their argument, drummed into the ears of politicians and repeated by a largely pro-surrogacy media, is simple:
make commercial surrogacy available in Australia and, as pro-surrogacy lobbyist Sam Everingham writes, it will
be "ethical."

Ethicist Bernadette Tobin disagrees: "If we thought that by legalising commercial surrogacy in Australia we could
give surrogacy an ethically sound underpinning we would be deceiving ourselves."

So who is right? Will a regulated commercial surrogacy industry do away with the exploitation of women and the
harms to children? Or is this a bridge too far for Australia?

The answer from the just released global campaign Stop Surrogacy Now is a resounding 'No!' Whether for love or
for money, the fact remains that surrogacy is the commissioning of a baby by affluent heterosexual or homosexual
couples using a woman of usually lower economic standing as a baby incubator - a breeder.

Surrogacy is dangerous. The surrogate mother - often callously called a "gestational carrier" - is required to submit
to a three to four week drug regimen in order to prepare her womb for pregnancy. These drugs can make her very
sick, possibly with long-term effects.

In addition to the battery of prenatal tests she must undergo, there is also the risk of pregnancy complications -
including ovarian torsion, ovarian cysts, chronic pelvic pain, premature menopause, loss of fertility, reproductive
cancers, blood clots, kidney disease, stroke and, in some cases, death.

Women who become pregnant with eggs from another woman are at higher risk for pre-eclampsia and high blood
pressure. The health risks are even worse for women who donate eggs, with the increased prevalence of Ovarian
Hyperstimulation Syndrome (OHSS) and ovarian cancer many years later. (I'd commend the eye-opening
documentary Eggsploitation for stories of women hurt by egg donation.)

What is demanded of a surrogate mother is the manufacture of a perfect baby - this is eugenics in action. If the
product is deemed flawed, she must consent to an abortion, selective reduction or foetal surgery in the womb.

At birth, the baby is most often removed by caesarean section, with the birth mother frequently not given the
chance to see her child. What is left is a woman with milk in her breasts but nothing in her arms. The attention that
for nine months had been lavished on the woman - who is called a hero, an angel, a giver of life by the
commissioning couple in an altruistic surrogacy arrangement - in the great majority of cases disappears very
quickly. Once the job is done, and the baby handed over, the birth mother, in whose body remain cells of her child
for decades, is left to her own devices.

Many surrogate mothers say it was their "choice." What sort of choice is it when one cannot predict the effect of
the drugs, the pregnancy and the birth on the woman? And what sort of choice is it for the baby? Did she or he
really "choose" to be separated from their birth mother?

I suggest we call out this cruel business for what it is: trafficking in babies; reproductive slavery; a violation of the
human rights of both the birth mother and her offspring. The group of like-minded women and men from around
the globe who have just started the campaign Stop Surrogacy Now, are calling on governments to put an end to
this exploitative industry "in order to protect women and children worldwide and to end efforts that would seek to
legitimize and normalize trafficking children." Less than five days since the campaign was launched, more than
3000 people have signed.

Compared to the United States, India, Ukraine and Mexico, Australia is still in the fortunate position of prohibiting
commercial surrogacy, and altruistic surrogacy is well regulated in all states except the Northern Territory which
has no laws. Moreover, the actual number of babies born through altruistic surrogacy arrangements is negligible.
The National Perinatal Epidemiology and Statistics Unit (NPESU) publishes yearly reports that include data
supplied by 37 fertility centres in Australia and New Zealand. The latest available 2011 and 2012 reports state:

"There were 177 gestational surrogacy cycles in 2011, including 131 gestational carrier cycles and 46 cycles
undertaken by intended parents. Among the 131 gestational carrier cycles, 34 (26.0%) resulted in a clinical
pregnancy and 21 (16.0%) resulted in a delivery. Of all 23 babies born to gestational carriers (21 singletons and
one set of twins), 22 were liveborn and one singleton's outcome was unknown."

In other words, in 2011 there were 23 babies born from surrogacy in Australia. It is noteworthy that this
represented a mere success rate of 16%. In 2012, there were 4 fewer babies born, representing a success rate of
only 15.7%. A very small number of babies are born from altruistic surrogacy arrangements in Australia and New
Zealand - not exactly the thousands of cases that pro-surrogacy propaganda would lead us to believe.

Would this change with the advent of commercial surrogacy in Australia? Perhaps unemployed women might
think that $30-40,000 is worth the risk and discomfort of pregnancy; or that they could always resort to selling
their eggs four, five, six times for $5,000 per batch. For the commissioning parents - euphemistically called
"intended parents" - the price would be much higher because the surrogacy industry's lawyers, counsellors,
surrogacy brokers and, last but not least, the IVF clinics who delight in this new business opportunity, would all
demand their share. The government too might be eager to collect taxes from the various players involved in
commercial surrogacy - surrogates and egg donors included. A $100,000 price tag for a baby can easily be
countenanced. And because of the high failure rates, repeat pregnancies make the procedure harder for the birth
mother and more expensive for the buyers.

So do Australians really want an expanded fertility industry? I would hope that cool heads prevail and commercial
surrogacy is not introduced in this country.

It was only in 2013 that then Prime Minister Julia Gillard delivered a heartfelt apology to mothers and their
children who were forcibly removed for adoption in the 1960s and 70s. We would do well to remember the trauma
and depth of feeling this apology elicited in discussions about surrogacy, which is the intentional removal of a
child from his or her birth mother. Do we really want to find ourselves in the position forty years hence of having
to deliver yet another apology to children who were harmed by surrogacy.

The first order of business would be to lower the demand for all forms of surrogacy, including so-called altruistic
surrogacy. There is no right to a child. A deep desire for a child does not justify the narcissistic exploitation of
another woman's body and soul, as well as her health - two women, in fact, if an egg donor is also needed.

People who long for children should be encouraged to look to permanent care arrangements for the thousand of
existing children in Australia who need a loving home. Having a baby with your own genes is not a prerequisite: it
is love and dedication that counts.

Children are not commodities to be bought and sold, and women are not containers to be used as baby makers and
then discarded. Let's stop surrogacy now.

It depends on whether or not you have given birth to one live child. If you haven't, you will not be able to be a
surrogate, because a basic requirement for surrogacy is having one surviving child. If you do have one child, some
IP's may not be willing to use you as their GS because of your abortion history. Most surrogate agencies will
accept you; however, if there was a medical reason for the abortion (e.g. the baby had a fatal diagnosis), you will
probably not be allowed to be a surrogate. One of the basic requirements for gestational surrogacy is complication-
free pregnancies.
Gay Parenting through Surrogacy
Circle Surrogacy is the leading surrogacy agency in the United States for gay couples and individuals. John
Weltman, Circles President, Founder and gay parent through surrogacy, has been helping LGBT couples and
individuals from around the world become parents since 1995.

Circle offers a variety of gay surrogacy options to intended parents in a warm, flexible and supportive
environment. And we hold all of our clinics to our same high standards on LGBT parenting issues.

What does gay surrogacy from Circle include?

A network of fertility clinics

SPAR program for HIV+ men

Database of egg donors

Access to sperm donors

Matching with gay-friendly surrogates and egg donors

Support and empathy from a dedicated staff

Unique parenthood options tailored to your wants and needs

We Protect You
Circles legal team ensures that your parental rights are affirmed and safeguarded. Whether you obtain a second-
parent adoption, judgment of paternity/maternity, or custody orders, we are here to guide you and find solutions
that protect your family. In addition to our years of experience working with same-sex couples, we continue to
monitor legal and procedural developments around the world that affect all of our LGBT intended
parents pursuing surrogacy.

LGBT Community Efforts

We know that having a baby is the first step in your familys growth. Our joint efforts with non-profit agencies,
such as Family Equality Council and Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD), are a reflection of
our commitment to both our current and future gay intended parents

n mid-October, the Supreme Court raised questions against the practice of commercial surrogacy. Later that
month, the Centre responded with a ban on foreign couples hiring surrogates in India, permitting only altruistic
surrogacy for infertile Indian couples. Although these changes are not surprising given the recent ban on
commercial surrogacy in Thailand and Nepal, the justification of such a move needs greater scrutiny. Media frenzy
on high profile cases of babies being stateless and parentless, such as, Baby Manji in India (2008) and Baby
Gammy in Thailand (2015) had exerted immense pressure on the Centre to take the right decision. The resulting
ban is an expression of the governments reservations on the burgeoning business of surrogacy in India.

India had become an international hub of commercial surrogacy. While the Indian Council of Medical Research
(ICMR) estimates the business to be worth $450 million, the most widely used mythical value for this
unregulated market is $2.3 billion. Consequently, it was referred to as the pot of gold by the Law Commission of
India (2009). Low costs and convenient regulations (such as having the name of commissioning parents on the
birth certificate and keeping surrogates under constant supervision for nine months in a hostel) attracted intending
parents from around the globe.

Is it exploitative?

The Indian government has banned commercial surrogacy on the grounds of exploitation of poor, needy women.
Researchers have chalked out diverse reasons for cross-border commercial surrogacy to be exploitative moral,
financial and emotional. It is considered morally reprehensible to allow poor fertile women from the global south
to rent their womb for rich infertile women from the global north. As an extension of this, some have even
described it as modern-day slavery and a mockery of motherhood.

On the financial aspect, it is difficult to assess whether surrogacy is really that bad an option in a country where
unpleasant social situations force women to unwillingly become sex workers or poverty induces people to sell
their organs. Given that the life of an average Indian surrogate is mired in poverty and inequality, arguments of
financial exploitation can sound rhetorical and borrowed from the West. Besides, the argument is relative, and
renders the exploitation theory weak at a policy level. Commercial surrogacy in India supported thousands of
childless couples, generated revenue via medical tourism, and was a valuable source of income for surrogates.

Moreover, surrogates were paid 10 years equivalent of their regular income which challenges the exploitation
argument. Barring exceptions, the women are not forced into surrogacy and are aware of the financial aspects of
the contract, making it an informed choice. However, compared to the US, where a surrogate is paid as much as 50
per cent of the total cost, in India, the surrogate receives approximately 20 per cent (or less). Therefore, the case
for doubling the share of total costs for surrogates is compelling.

A further dimension

However, exploitation has another dimension. It can also be emotional, stemming from factors related to informed
consent, dignity of reproductive labour, and the psychological well-being of the parties involved. From that
standpoint, undoubtedly, the structure of commercial surrogacy in India has been anything but satisfactory.
Aspects such as surrogates not knowing the number of embryos inserted or aborted, not having a say in wanting to
see/meet the baby , not even being aware of the nationality of the intending parents, and not receiving
psychological counselling are undoubtedly tantamount to exploitation. Considering these aspects, policy-level
intervention is a welcome step. However, a ban on commercial surrogacy will not provide a solution to these
issues.

From a monetary standpoint, selling a womb or buying a baby raises many ethical questions. Nonetheless, one
wonders if removing the payment aspect makes it more exploitative. While the Centre has voiced its assent to
altruistic surrogacy the surrogate does not receive financial incentives above and beyond the required basic
expenses of bearing a child for infertile Indian couples, it has its own plausible limitations. First, there is no
guarantee that rich, infertile couples would not exploit poor, fertile women. Second, research suggests that
receiving payment creates a psychological detachment of the surrogate from the growing foetus. Therefore, it
can be surmised that the possibility of developing a bond with the foetus could be higher in altruistic surrogacy.
Third, it is difficult for any official authority to track the gifts being exchanged between the parties involved in
the name of compensation. Lastly, altruistic surrogacy could also put voiceless, oppressed women in a highly
vulnerable position, further disempowering them.

There are other contentious issues. For instance, would the Indian government, like in the UK, allow the surrogate
to keep the child if she desires? Whose name would be written on the birth certificate the surrogates or the
intending parents? What would be the guidelines governing disclosure and relinquishment? This opens up a
plethora of questions that need to be addressed.
Psychological impact

It is important to understand the levels of psychological distress a surrogate faces upon parting with the newborn.
A UK-based study found that surrogate mothers are able to detach themselves from the newborn. Such detachment
finds expression in these women successfully seeing themselves as carriers of someone elses baby. My own
research has revealed that most of the surrogates display a sense of psychological distress at their inability to see
the newborn and the intending parents, preventing them from developing a sense of closure following the
surrogacy arrangement. Therefore, it is important that the new policy equips surrogates with a voice of their own.
Research also suggests that surrogates feel an ease in separation when they know where the child is going. This
makes for healthy interactions (at least during pregnancy and briefly after delivery) between the intending parents
and the surrogate, so crucial for a successful surrogacy arrangement.

Surrogacy is exceedingly complex in its social, biological, cultural and psychological implications. There is no
unanimity over an ideal surrogacy arrangement. The practice in any part of the world is, admittedly, not without
loopholes, both in its commercial and altruistic forms. While both practices require intense regulation, the
feasibility of implementing onerous regulations needs a healthy dose of realism in the Indian context. A blanket
ban does not address the real need and could simply drive the surrogacy market underground, making it worse for
all concerned.

efinitely there is a need to have a surrogacy law in a country like India which has become a regular destination for
Surrogacy past few yrs. India which has most poor in the world are also the most vulnerable. They are naive and
can be befooled by expert doctors and customers associated with the Surrogacy trade which has crores of market
now . Till now lack of any law made surrogacy a pvt trade with some of clinics having own contracts in
consonance with Assisted Reproductive technology bill as asked by SC of India. But evidence are there of disputes
and harassment/abuse of the surrogate mothers. But the much awaited surrogacy bill has put the virtual full stop to
surrogacy altogether and amazed most as it has brought several impediments to the process of surrogacy in India.
It although prvents people from abuse but not all were abused many were also benefited.As poor people and those
who were declared unfertile.

It's also been misused by some celebrity. The bill allows only close relative to be surrogate and say no to
foreigners , even to OCI. The clause of surrogacy is thus too complicated

The Surrogacy Bill, 2016 has been in making for a decade now. It was drafted in a number of ways but it is
only now that the draft has been finally tabled and guess what? This one probably is the worst of the lot.

Surrogacy Bill, 2016

Flaws and unjust bans is what sums up the cabinet approved Surrogacy Bill, 2016 which will be presented in
Parliament for approval in the next session.

Instead of understanding and addressing the issues which need to be regulated, the newly tabled Bill seeks to
impose bans which will kill the fertility treatment.

For the longest of times surrogacy industry has flourished in India but from what it looks, the bill is just going to
end it all.

The Bill allows altruistic surrogacy for a limited section of society. Only childless, heterosexual Indian couples
who have been married for five years and are living in India can now avail of fertility treatment. And if they need
to find a surrogate to carry the baby, they have to seek out a relative who will do it out of altruism.

With this sweeping ban, the Bill negates the rights of parenthood to single persons, divorcees, widowed persons,
same sex couples, live-in relationship partners and others who come outside the patriarchal norm.
Questions That Need to be Addressed:

What about the rights of the above mentioned sections of the society? And what if one cannot find a
suitable person? And these bans have been taken to prevent the women in the industry from exploitation?
Ever heard that women are exploited and forced into doing something by their own families the most than
anyone else?

Do you think a sister-in-law have much say when she is approached to be a surrogate mother? Even it
would be against her wishes, shell be forced to go ahead with it.

And what about the women who were the sole bread earning member of the family depending on the
industry for 2 square meals a day?

If the foetus is discovered to have a problem, what happens if the surrogate mother decides she does not
want an abortion for religious or emotional reasons? Will the parents, who are compelled by law to not
abandon the child, born out of a surrogacy procedure, under any circumstances, find themselves capable
of taking care of the child?

What if the surrogacy results in a girl child and the adoptive parents want an abortion? Will, given the
circumstances in India, the surrogate mother have a choice?

Oh, and heres the reason why live-in and homosexual couples cannot opt for surrogacy. We dont
recognise homosexuality and live-in relationships. It is against our ethos.

Whose ethos and what are these ethos that we are talking about? Because if the we in the statement
refers to the public opinion, we do recognise it.

As for those who fit within the Indian governments carefully defined outline, you cant opt for altruistic
surrogacy if you have a biological or adopted child, unless your child is mentally or physically challenged
or suffers from a life-threatening disorder or fatal illness.

So, basically the bill says Well decide if you can have a child; otherwise, of course, you are free to
adopt.?

And some might say that adoption is a solution? There are thousands of children who might need a home,
but isnt adoption supposed to be a personal choice?

And why is it that the bill just talks about imposing bans and not regulation of the industry?

Why does the bill blatantly ignore the commercial surrogate mothers and the reason why they rent out
their womb? I mean is the bill really aimed at saving women from the exploitation?

The bill is somehow effecting everyone but the affected. Just bans, bans and bans. Wheres the
improvement or betterment of the people?

Seeing the bill in light of these questions, what can be inferred is only those with a proper understanding of the
entire process can bring in legislation which is pertinent, meaningful and seeks to nurture rather than kill.

And isnt that the only thing what we demand of such a legislation?

If the bill gets approved in the Parliament, a step aimed at saving a few will definitely be unjust for a larger
part of the population in the country!

For singles and couples who cant naturally conceive and carry a baby to term, surrogacy is sometimes considered
an option to have a child. Current laws across Australia permit altruistic surrogacy which prohibit the exchange
of funds for surrogacy, beyond reasonable expenses, in order to protect the woman and child involved.

Some commentators argue these restrictions should be lifted to allow commercial surrogacy. This would involve a
transaction between a commissioning person or couple and a woman, either directly or via a broker. So the woman
carries and bears a child, and then permanently relinquishes it to the commissioning person or couple, in exchange
for a fee.

But while advocates for commercial surrogacy in Australia present it as a workable solution to issues of global
exploitation of women and children, if you look a little deeper it emerges as an ethically and legally fraught
process. Australia should not join the ranks of Guatemala, India, Thailand, Russia, Georgia, the Ukraine and some
US states which permit commercial surrogacy.

The market mentality

Commercial surrogacy advocates focus on payment for the surrogates services, using strong market-based
language. Such market mentality preys on peoples vulnerabilities, and detracts from the realities involved.

Commissioning couples are sold the idea that commercial surrogacy is simply a business transaction that can be
performed with ease. They are told they will achieve emotional fulfilment and a family of their own using
commercial surrogates who are really giving, altruistic women, who want to help (for a fee or compensation).

The reality of commercial surrogacy paints a different picture. Concerns for women and children are minimised or
ignored by brokers, lawyers, and others who stand to profit.

Sociological studies of surrogates suggest that commercial surrogates are susceptible to financial inducement and
are vulnerable to exploitation because of their financial status. As US legal researcher Katherine Drabiak points
out:

rhetoric that portrays the surrogate as a reasonably well-educated, financially stable woman motivated by altruism
stands in contrast to reality.

This is so in both developing and developed countries.

Commissioning couples are sold the idea that commercial surrogacy is simply a business transaction that can be
performed with ease. Image from shutterstock.com
Some proponents of commercial surrogacy argue that in order to prevent exploitation, surrogates should be paid a
minimum amount to compensate them for the risk and burden they take. Allegedly the minimum payment will
serve to avoid unfair inducements.

But who would act as a surrogate in such circumstances? Its most likely to be women who are vulnerable or
financially needy: low-income single mothers, migrants, unemployed women, or mothers unable to work and care
for her children at the same time enticed (or induced) by the minimum payment.

Perhaps what will follow is that we will be asked to believe that accepting low payments for commercial
surrogacy reflects that surrogates are not really doing it for the money after all. Of course, such rhetoric keeps the
price of commercial surrogacy down.

Note, while advocates of commercial surrogacy equate carrying a child with labour (work), they do not suggest
that anywhere near the minimum wage be paid (24 hours a day for nine months at A$16/per hour = approximately
A$107,000).

Finally, we cant forget that the marketisation of birth involves a child. That child will perhaps one day be aware
of the commercial transaction that surrounded his or her birth. The consequences of being handed over for
minimum compensation are unknown.

Global commercial surrogacy

There is no doubt that in the global commercial surrogacy market, poor and vulnerable women have been
trafficked for use as surrogates for the profit of agents or brokers.

Even in more routine cases, in both the developing and developed world, there are concerns about the extent to
which women engaged as surrogates are influenced by social, cultural, and economic inequities.

This is not reason to bring commercial surrogacy to Australia. In fact, it should be reason not to do so.

Back in Australia, those who commission surrogates in commercial arrangements abroad must apply for legal
parentage of these children. This is not always guaranteed. In such instances, our concern should lie with the
welfare and best interests of the child, but this does not mean that legal parentage should be assured. Courts must
scrutinise each individual case.

The law should not be changed because of people who have chosen to enter into, or facilitate, commercial
surrogacy arrangements abroad sometimes in contravention of Australian laws.

Protecting women and children

Australian states and territories need to preserve their current laws that serve to protect women and children by
prohibiting commercial surrogacy, while permitting altruistic surrogacy in some circumstances. Everyone
should be treated equally under such laws.

Australia also has an obligation to work to reduce the international commercial surrogacy trade. One option is to
prohibit Australians from engaging in such arrangements abroad. But in doing so we must be careful to recognise
the vulnerabilities of commissioning parents too. As such, we need also consider the actions of lawyers and other
agencies who make a business (and handsome profit) out of giving advice to people about commercial
surrogacy abroad, and who are pushing for its inception here.

Most importantly, Australia needs also to facilitate and support different family formations via other means, such
as co-parenting arrangements, or foster-care and adoption when there is a child in need. We must recognise the
desire some people feel to have children but commercial surrogacy should not be sold to them as a way to achieve
such desire.

GayParenting.org

GayParenting.org is one of the Internets largest resources for LGBT individuals interested in becoming parents.
They are there to help you find answers and offer support on the challenges of starting up a family you can call
your own. They believe that there is no one solution for all the challenges in raising up a family.

Surrogacy Bill 2016 - Whats wrong -

This bill however, instead of regulating commercial surrogacy, bans it. I personally am not for it. While I agree
that adoption is a better option and people should be encouraged to do so, but the way to do it is not by banning
modes of ART.

I believe in absolute exercise of fundamental right in choosing the mode of parenthood that you want as long as no
rights are violated in the process. It is ridiculous to compare surrogacy to prostitution. In prostitution you have sex
for money. In commercial surrogacy you are giving birth to a child (whose genetic material is that of the
commissioning couple) for the consideration of money.

Neither is bad.

The government is being dogmatic and a bit regressive if you ask me in coming up with this kind of a law.
Commercial surrogacy as it is practised now, in line with the provisions of the ART bill is a good option. I have
personally drafted excellent Commercial surrogacy agreements taking into consideration the rights of all the
parties involved.

Commercial surrogacy therefore, shouldn't be banned. It should be regulated. And I hope this bill doesn't get
passed in its current state.

Surrogacy or Womb for Rent. Surrogacy is not something which is new to India. If you would look back into the
history there are many instances of surrogacy in one or other way.

Before discussing the New Surrogacy Bill, lets see what are the issues related with surrogacy-

1. Child born through surrogacy- What happens to the child if the commissioning parents separate during the
pregnancy or unfortunately die in an accident? What is the position of the child if the commissioning
parents are from a country where surrogacy is totally banned? Abandonment of child born with
deformities.

2. Surrogate Mother- India is known for its abundance of labour and their cheap availability. With the growth
in the surrogacy business, the surrogate mothers are looked upon as same and thence are paid less in
comparison what they are paid in other countries plus their lack of education add on to their woes. What if
the surrogate mother dies during the birth of the child as under many surrogate agreements the prime
importance is given to the child?

3. Parents who go for surrogacy (commissioning parents)- When the surrogate mother does not want to give
away the child? [1]

With the passage of the new bill, the Government aims to counter the above issues by putting a blanket ban on
commercialization of motherhood or business of motherhood. Also one of the another major aim of the
Government is to protect the surrogate mother from exploitation. Every aspect has two sides: one bad and other
good. Same way surrogacy in India had its pros and cons. There had been no proper regulation for the surrogacy
till now in India.

The Surrogacy Bill, 2016 only allows close female relative not necessarily blood related to be engaged as a
surrogate. Further the Bill has only allowed heterosexual couples to go for surrogacy with the condition that they
should have been married atleast for 5 years. And the second condition is that the couple should have a medical
certificate stating that conception is not possible due to certain medical grounds. The 2016 Bill bars the
homogeneous couples, single parent and live in parents from adopting surrogacy as a way of parenthood.

Every law that is passed in India should stand the test of equality, i. e., equal treatment to equal people and if not
then the different behavior shall be one guided by reasonable, justifiable and intellectual reasons. Also sufficient
nexus should be shown between the object of the law and the classification made therein. No plausible explanation
has been given for the classification of married couples for five years. How can be a classification made between a
couple who has been married for two, three or five years?What about the rights of single parents, live in couples
and homosexuals and why are they not allowed to parenthood.

Commercial surrogacy shouldn't be banned but instead should be highly regulated. Exploitation of the surrogate
has been the main reason for the ban. Instead of a ban, the government should bring in a regulatory environment
for the regulation of surrogacy. The government can restrict the number of times upto 23 a woman can become a
surrogate for another couple when she does it for money. After the surroagte mother gets the money she can start a
new business with that or make alternate arrangements so that steady income in ensued to the family. [2]

The Government may have a good intention for not allowing a live in couple as the chances of separation are
comparatively high and may risk the future of the child and even the surrogate mother if they separate during her
pregnancy and later deny to take the custody of child. But the solution is not to exclude them but to strictly
regulate it and may even include utilitarian measures.

The other trend stronlgy condemned by Mrs. Sushma Swaraj was adoption of surrogacy by many celebrity couples
like Sharukh Khan and Amir Khan. These are the celebrities who are followed widely by many in our country and
are trendsetters. They already had kids and when wanted to have another child could have resorted to adoption
thereby encouraging adoption which could have given orphanages also a better home, life and future. Sushmita
Sen (Indian Actress, Miss Universe 1994) also adopted two girls and is a single parent. Do you remember the story
of Aditya who hailed from a middle class family in Indore and his story of struggle in adopting a child suffering
from Down Syndrome. Hes Indias youngest single parent. Mr. Tushar Kapoor (Indian Actor) also recently
announced the birth of his son through surrogacy. Such people have the capacity to influence the masses and the
masses follows what they do. With the kind of social and financial status they have they can easily go for adoption
and encourage others to do the same.