Surrogacy

Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Volumn 27, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 246-251

  Nakash, A ^a,c   Herdiman, J ^b  

^a HOMERTON UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL OF WALES   (United Kingdom)

^c NONE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Infertility; Law; Surrogacy

Indexed keywords

ADOPTION; ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION; AUSTRALIA; BIRTH CERTIFICATE; CANADA; CHILD PARENT RELATION; CHILDBIRTH; CHINA; COURT; DELIVERY; FEMALE; FEMALE INFERTILITY; GOVERNMENT; HUMAN; INFERTILITY THERAPY; JAPAN; LEGAL ASPECT; MATERNAL WELFARE; MOTHER; PREGNANCY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGENY; RELIGION; REVIEW; RUSSIAN FEDERATION; SPERM DONOR; UNITED KINGDOM; UNITED STATES;

FEMALE; HUMANS; PREGNANCY; SOCIAL WELFARE; SURROGATE MOTHERS; WORLD HEALTH;

EID: 34247588662     PISSN: 01443615     EISSN: 13646893     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01443610701194788     Document Type: Review

References (40)

1. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) Committee on Ethics. 1990. Ethical issues in surrogate motherhood. Washington DC: ACOG.
2. Appleton T. 2001. Surrogacy. Current Obstetrics and Gynaecology 11:256-257.
3. JSOG. 2001. Association of Japanese muscular dystrophy. Apprehension about surrogacy. Available at: http://www.jsog.or.jp/kaiin/html/kaikoku/H15_4. html (in Japanese).
4. BBC online network. 1999. UK legal landmark for gay dads. Available at: bbc.co.uk
5. BBC. 2004. Surrogate twins-miracle babies. Available at: bbc.co.uk.
6. Blyth E, Potter C. 2003. Paying for it? Surrogacy, market forces and assisted conception. In: Cook R, Sclater S, Kaganas F, editors. Surrogate motherhood: international perspectives. Ch 15. pp 227-242.
7. Brazier M, Campbell A, Golombok S. 1998. Surrogacy: review for health ministers of current arrangements for payments and regulation. Report of the Review Team London: HMSO; Cm 4068.
8. British Medical Association (BMA). 1996. Changing conception of motherhood: The practice of surrogacy in Britain. London: BMA Publications.
9. British Medical Association (BMA). 2003. Considering surrogacy? Your question answered. London: BMA Publications.
10. Burrell R. 2005. Assisted reproduction in the Nordic Countries: a comparative study of policies and regulation. Nordic Committee on Bioethics.
11. Civil Code of Quebec (CCQ). Art. 53 [ad. 1991, c.64].
12. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. 1987. Instruction on respect for human life in its origin and on the dignity of procreation. Vatican City.
13. Golombok S, MacCallum F, Goodman E, Rutter M. 2002a. Families with children conceived by donor insemination: A follow-up at age 12. Child Development 73:952-968.
14. Golombok S, Brewaeys A, Giavazzi MT, Guerra D, MacCallum F, Rust J. 2002b. The European Study of Assisted Reproduction Families: The transition to adolescence. Human Reproduction 17:830-840.
15. Golombok S, Murray C, Brinsden P, Abdalla H. 1999. Social versus biological parenting: Family functioning and the socioemotional development of children conceived by egg or sperm donation. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines 40:519-527.
16. Hirsh AV. 1998. Infertility in Jewish couples, biblical and rabbinic law. Human Fertility 1:14-19.
17. House of Commons of Canada. 2004. Bill C-6. 3rd Session, 37th Parliament, 52-53 Elizabeth II.
18. Japan Federation of Bar Associations (JFBA). 2000. Available at: http://www.nichibenren.or.jp/jp/katsudo/sytyou/iken/00/2000_11.html (in Japanese).
19. Joint Canadian Fertility and Andrology Society/Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada Report. 1999. Ethical issues in assisted reproduction. Journal of the Society of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Canada 21:71-74.
20. McCormick RA. 1992. Surrogacy: a catholic perspective. Creighton Law Review 25:1617-1625.
21. Ministry of Health. 2001. Measures of administration of human assisted reproductive technologies. Health Newspaper 6 March: 3.
22. Assisted Reproductive Technology Committee (ARTC). 2003. Ministry of Health Labour and Welfare Reproductive medicine accessory section: Account about maintenance of reproductive medicine institution of transplantation of spermatozoon/ovum/embryo. 2003. Tokyo: ARTC.
23. Mufti Allie Haroun Sheik. 2003. Islamic principles on family planning. Qasmi Publication. pp 150-153. Available at: http:// www.central-mosque.com/ fiqh/test-tube.htm
24. Nozawa S, Banno K. 2004. Surrogacy. Japan Medical Association Journal 47:192-203.
25. Pinkerton TM. 1998. Surrogacy and egg donation law in California. The American Surrogacy Center, Inc. (TASC), Kennesaw, GA. Available at: http://www.surrogacy.com/legals/article/calaw.html
26. Ren-Zong Q. 2002. Sociocultural dimensions of infertility and assisted reproduction in the Far East. Current practices and controversies in assisted reproduction. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organisation.
27. Rowe PJ. 1983. Report on the workshop on the standardized investigation of the infertile couple. In: Harrison RF, Bonnar J, Thompson W, editors. Proceedings of the XIth World Congress on Fertility and Sterility, Dublin. Lancaster: MTP Press. pp 427-442.
28. Schenker JG. 1997. Infertility evaluation and treatment according to Jewish law. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Reproductive Biology 71:113-121.
29. Schenker JG. 2005. Assisted reproductive practice: religious perspectives. Reproductive Biomedicine Online 10:310-319.
30. Shrybman J. 2000. Maryland Surrogacy Law. The American Surrogacy Center, Inc. (TASC), Kennesaw, GA. Available at: http://www.surrogacy.com/legals/ article/txlaw.html
31. Soderstrom-Antilla V, Sajaneimi N, Tiitinen A, Hovatta O. 1998. Health and development of children born after oocyte donation compared with that of those born after in-vitro fertilization, and parents' attitudes regarding secrecy. Human Reproduction 13:2009-2015.
32. Soini S, Ibarreta D, Anastasiadou V, Ayme S, Braga S, Cornel M et al. 2006. The interface between medically assisted reproduction and genetics: technical, social, ethical and legal issues. European Journal of Human Genetics 14:588-645.
33. Stern G. 2003. Legal status of surrogacy in Texas. The American Surrogacy Center, Inc. (TASC), Kennesaw, GA. Available at: http://www.surrogacy.com/ legals/article/txlaw.html
34. Taylor P. 2003. Surrogacy: arrangements and payments. London: The Centre for Bioethics and Public Policy.
35. Taylor P. 2005. Review of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act: A Public Consultation. London: Department of Health.
36. The Surrogate Parenthood Act 1998. The Office of the Queensland Parliamentary Counsel.
37. United States New Jersey Superior Court, Chancery Division, Family Part, Bergen County. 1987. In: Re: Baby M., 31 March. Annual Review of Population Law 14:60.
38. United States New Jersey Supreme Court. 1988. Matter of Baby M. Annual Review of Population Law 15:61. [From: 537 A.2d 1227].
39. Van den Akker O. 2000. The importance of a genetic link in mothers commissioning a surrogate baby in the UK. Human Reproduction 15:1849-1855.
40. Vayena E, Rowe PJ, Griffin PD. 2002. Current practices and controversies in assisted reproduction. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organisation.