Commercial surrogacy: How provisions of monetary remuneration and powers of international law can prevent exploitation of gestational surrogates

Journal of Medical Ethics

Volumn 39, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 397-402

  Ramskold, Louise Anna Helena ^a   Posner, Marcus Paul ^b  

^a NORTH MIDDLESEX UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b ROYAL LONDON HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION AND SURROGACY; AUTONOMY; COMMERCIAL PHENOMENA; ETHICS; FEMALE; HUMAN; INCOME; INFERTILITY THERAPY; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; LEGAL ASPECT; LEGAL ASPECTS; MEDICAL TOURISM; MEDICOLEGAL ASPECT; MORAL AND RELIGIOUS ASPECTS; MOTHER; PERSONAL AUTONOMY; PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION; POVERTY; PREGNANCY; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; REMUNERATION; SELF HELP; SOCIAL JUSTICE; SOUTHEAST ASIA; UNITED KINGDOM; UNITED STATES; VULNERABLE POPULATION;

ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION AND SURROGACY; AUTONOMY; COERCION; LEGAL ASPECTS; MORAL AND RELIGIOUS ASPECTS;

ASIA, SOUTHEASTERN; COERCION; COMMERCE; FEMALE; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; INCOME; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; INTERNATIONALITY; LEGISLATION, MEDICAL; MEDICAL TOURISM; PERSONAL AUTONOMY; POVERTY; PREGNANCY; REMUNERATION; REPRODUCTIVE TECHNIQUES, ASSISTED; SELF-HELP GROUPS; SOCIAL JUSTICE; SURROGATE MOTHERS; UNITED STATES; VULNERABLE POPULATIONS;

EID: 84878193725     PISSN: 03066800     EISSN: 14734257     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2012-100527     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Human Fertilisation Embryology Authority. Fertility Facts and Figures 2008. 2010. http://www.hfea.gov.uk/docs/ 2010-12-08_Fertility_Facts_and_Figures_2008_Publication_PDF.PDF (accessed 17 Jul 2012).
2. Mills M, Rindfuss RR, McDonald P, et al. ESHRE Reproduction and Society Task Force. Why do people postpone parenthood? Reasons and social policy incentives. Hum Reprod Update 2011;17(6):848-60.
3. Re X and Y (Foreign Surrogacy) [2008] EWHC 3030 (Fam)
4. Re L (a minor) [2010] EWHC 3146 (Fam)
5. Donchin A. Reproductive tourism and the quest for global gender justice. Bioethics 2010;24(7):323-32.
6. Sarojini N, Marwah V, Shenoi A. Globalisation of birth markets: a case study of assisted reproductive technologies in India. Global Health 2011;7:1-27.
7. Deonondan R, Green S, van Beinum A. Ethical concerns for maternal surrogacy and reproductive tourism. J Med Ethics 2012;38(12):742-5.
8. Whittaker A. Cross-border assisted reproduction care in Asia: implications for access, equity and regulations. Reprod Health Matters 2011;19(37):107-16.
9. Nakash A, Herdiman J. Surrogacy. J Obstet Gynaecol 2007;27(3):246-51.
10. Erin CA, Harris J. Surrogacy. Baillieres Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 1991;5(3):611-35.
11. Surrogacy Arrangements Act 1985 (c.49) [statute on the Internet]. 1985. http:// www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1985/49/contents (accessed 10 Jul 2012).
12. Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of biomedical ethics. New York: Oxford University Press, 1977.
13. Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of biomedical ethics. 4th edn. New York: Oxford University Press, 1994.
14. Ber R. Ethical issues in gestational surrogacy. Theor Med Bioeth 2000;21:153-69.
15. Hadfield G. The dilemma of choice: a feminist perspective on the limits of freedom of contract. Osgoode Hall L J 1995;33:337-51.
16. Radin MJ. Market-inalienability. Harv L Rev 1987;100:1849-937.
17. Aramesh K. Iran's experience with surrogate motherhood: an Islamic view and ethical concerns. J Med Ethics 2009;35:320-2.
18. Damelio J, Sorensen K. Enhancing autonomy in paid surrogacy. Bioethics 2008;22:269-77.
19. van Zyl L, van Niekerk A. Interpretations, perspectives and intentions in surrogate motherhood. J Med Ethics 2000;26:404-9.
20. Hope T, Savulescu J, Hendrick J. Medical ethics and law: the core curriculum. London: Churchill Livingstone, 2003:115-31.
21. Lane M. Bioethics, health, and inequality. Lancet 2004;364(9439):1017-19.
22. Human Rights Act 1998 (c.42) [statute on the Internet]. 1998. http://www. legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/contents (accessed 10 Jul 2012).
23. Humbyrd C. Fair trade international surrogacy. Dev World Bioeth 2009;9 (3):111-18.
24. Freeman M. Does surrogacy have a future after Brazier? Med Law Rev 1999;7(1):1-20.
25. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 (c.22) [statute on the Internet]. 2008. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2008/22/contents (accessed 10 Jul 2012).
26. Wilkinson S. The exploitation argument against commercial surrogacy. Bioethics 2003;17(2):169-87.
27. Ramsey J. Paying for reproduction-the case against paid surrogacy. Jurid Rev 2006;4:325-49.
28. Perdue AL. For love or money: an analysis of the contractual regulation of reproductive surrogacy. J Contemp Health Law Policy 2011;27(2):279-313.
29. Teman E. Embodying surrogate motherhood: pregnancy as a dyadic body-project. Body Soc 2009;15:47-69.
30. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Instruction on Respect for Human Life in its Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation. 1987. http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19870222_respect-for-human-life_en.html (accessed 17 Jul 2012).
31. Inhorn MC. Globalization and gametes: reproductive 'tourism,' Islamic bioethics, and Middle Eastern modernity. Anthropol Med 2011;18(1):87-103.
32. Anderson ES. Why commercial surrogate motherhood unethically commodifies women and children: reply to McLachlan and Swales. Health Care Anal 2000;8 (1):19-26.
33. Banerjee S, Basu S. Rent a womb: surrogate selection, investment incentives and contracting. J Econ Behav Organ 2009;69(3):260-73.
34. Field MA. The case against enforcement of surrogacy contracts. Politics Life Sci 1990;8(2):199-204.
35. Sargent M. Regulating egg donation: a comparative analysis of reproductive technologies in the United States and United Kingdom. Mich Journal Pub Aff 2007;4:1-17.
36. The Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Financial compensation of oocyte donors. Fertil Steril 2007;88(2):305-9.
37. Human Tissue Act 2004 (c.30) [statute on the Internet]. 2004. http://www. legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/30/contents (accessed 10 Jul 2012).
38. Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. Investigations into Adverse Incidents During Clinical Trails of TGN1412. 2006. http://www.mhra.gov.uk/home/ groups/comms-po/documents/websiteresources/con2023519.pdf (accessed 10 Jul 2012).
39. Bromham DR. Surrogacy: ethical, legal, and social aspects. J Assist Reprod Genet 1995;12:509-16.
40. Parks JA. Care ethics and the global practice of commercial surrogacy. Bioethics 2010;24(7):333-40.
41. Baslington H. The social organization of surrogacy: Relinquishing a baby and the role of payment in the psychological detachment process. J Health Psychol 2002;7 (1):57-71.
42. Tieu MM. Altruistic surrogacy: the necessary objectification of surrogate mothers. J Med Ethics 2009;35(3):171-75.
43. CW v NT [2011] EWHC 33 (Fam)
44. In the matter of N (a child) [2007] EWCA Civ 1053
45. Re IJ. (a child) [2011] EWHC 921 (Fam).
46. Re X. (children) [2011] EWHC 3147 (Fam).
47. Gamble N. Crossing the line: the legal and ethical problems of foreign surrogacy. Reprod Biomed Online 2009;19(2):151-2.
48. Re C (a minor) (Wardship: Surrogacy) [1985] FLR 846
49. Brazier M, Golombok S, Campbell A. Surrogacy: review for the UK Health Ministers of current arrangements for payments and regulation. Hum Reprod Update 1997;3 (6):623-8.
50. Hague Conference on Private International Law. A Preliminary Report on the Issues Arising from International Surrogacy Arrangements drawn up by the Permanent Bureau. 2012. http://www.hcch.net/upload/wop/gap2012pd10en.pdf (accessed 17 July 2012).
51. A.G.R. v D.R.H & S.H., Docket #FD-09-1838-07, New Jersey 2009.
52. Baby M, 537 A.2d 1227, 109 N.J. 396, New Jersey 1988.
53. Johnson v Calvert, Supreme Court of California 851 P.2d 776, California 1993.
54. Laschell Baker v Scott & Amy Kehoe, Michigan 2009
55. Indian Council of Medical Research. National Guidelines for Accreditation, Supervision & Regulation of ART Clinics in India. 2005.http://icmr.nic.in/art/Prilim_Pages.pdf (accessed 17 Jul 2012).
56. Baby Manji Yamada v Union of India & ANR [2008] INSC 1656, Supreme Court of India, India 2008
57. Points K. Commercial Surrogacy and Fertility Tourism in India: The Case of Baby Manji. Durham, NC: Kenan Institute for Ethics, Duke University, 2009. http://www. duke.edu/web/kenanethics/CaseStudies/BabyManji.pdf (accessed 10 Jul 2012).
58. European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. Comparative Analysis of Medically Assisted Reproduction in the EU: Regulation and Technologies. 2009. http://www.eshre.eu/binarydata.aspx?type=doc&sessionId= 0rmwbc45zzqamzreqeb3aw45/MAR_for_web[2].pdf (accessed 17 July 2012).
59. Indian Council of Medical Research. Draft Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Bill 2010. 2010. http://icmr.nic.in/guide/ART%20REGULATION% 20Draft%20Bill1.pdf (accessed 17 July 2012).
60. Hague Conference on Private International Law. Overview on the World Organisation for Cross-Border Co-operation in Civil and Commercial Matters. 2012. http://www.hcch.net/index_en.php?act=text.display&tid=26 (accessed 10 Jul 2012).
61. Hague Conference on Private International Law. 33: The Hague Convention of 29 May 1993 on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Inter-country Adoption (Hague Adoption Convention). 1995. http://www.hcch.net/index_en.php? act=conventions.text&cid=69 (accessed 4 Sep 2011).
62. Beaumont P, Trimmings K. International surrogacy arrangements: an urgent need for legal regulation at the international level. J Private Int Law 2011;7:627-47.