Anderson’s second argument is that of degradation of the surrogate. This thinking may be true in some cases, but not all. Anderson makes the comparison of surrogates to a hatchery. Again, Anderson herself degrades surrogates by removing their autonomy and projecting them as docile and incompetent creatures who cannot enter into a contract without being exploited. Arneson rebuts this assertion by asking the question why is it permissible for a woman to act as a surrogate for a friend or family member (Altruistic Surrogacy) but as soon as money is entered into the equation (Commercial Surrogacy), it becomes morally unacceptable. Arneson’s point that the exchange of money for the service of surrogacy does not make the practice intrinsically harmful, …show more content…
Pande tries to shed more light on the economic and psychological empowerment and opportunity surrogacy has given women. Surrogates are introduced to medical services that are normally not accessible to them. Over the course of her research, Pande shifted her position and stated that the practice of surrogacy needs to be prohibited, and came to view surrogacy as ethical work that needs regulation in order not to exploit the women and babies. She believes surrogate mothers must be given the right to organize in labor unions and negotiate with the intended parents.
Pande thinks the long-range solution is to relax surrogacy regulation in other countries so that people don’t need to leave their home countries to find surrogate mothers. She proposed an international model of surrogacy founded on openness and transparency on three fronts: in the structure of payments, in the medical process, and in the relationships forged within surrogacy.
CONCLUSION:
Opinion will continue to be divided on whether commercial-surrogacy arrangements devalue children and women in intangible ways. But what has become clear is that well-designed regulation can greatly mitigate most of the potential tangible harms of surrogacy, and this would seem to be the appropriate function of law in a liberal society in response to an issue on which no societal consensus
Why the law is contradictory and ineffective when it comes to overseas surrogacy- Altruistic surrogacy is diversely regulated by the states and territories, raising the issue of the interaction of those laws in international cases. Commercial surrogacy is prohibited in Australia, but is permitted in other countries. An increasing number of Australians exploit this difference by entering into commercial surrogacy agreements overseas, raising the question of the effect of such agreements in Australia. Suggesting that the well-meaning regulation of altruistic surrogacy and criminalisation of commercial surrogacy within Australia is likely to be ineffective in cross-border situations. Accordingly, suggests to reform the Australian law and endorses
The procedures of surrogacy is a delicate and sensitive topic which raises many concerns in the public. As a result of this, Australian laws and courts of law must allow and regulate these practices to make it safe for all involved. Commercial forms of surrogacy agreements are illegal in most states, shown in Part 2, Division 2 in the Surrogacy Act 2010 NSW and Chapter 4 Part 1 in the Surrogacy Act Qld. However, in remaining jurisdictions, couples are allowed to deal in commercial agreements and therefore often turn to an overseas arrangement. It is here where Australian law becomes more obscure and less regulated. In any arrangement including altruistic surrogacy, there are no enforceable laws on the agreement, hence prompting multiple issues regarding the parentage of the child. When the child is born from the gestational carrier- the birth mother and father, according to the Status of the Children Act 1996, are the legal parents. It is when the intended parents apply for a parenting order and accepted by the birth mother that the child’s parentage is transferred- this situation is set out in the case of Re Michael
I read an article that was published on The Hasting Center Journal, called “The Case Against Surrogate Parenting”, by Herbert Krimmel, Krimmel takes a stand against surrogate motherhood arrangements because of the many ethical issues it causes, he argues surrogate motherhood, is a financial profit, there can be conflicts during the process, and is designed to separate in the mind of the surrogate mother. First, Krimmel argues that the reason a woman often or always undertakes the pregnancy is because of the money motive. He states, “The cause of this dissociation is some other benefit she will receive, most often money.' In other words, her desire to create a child is born of some motive other than the desire to be a parent. This separation
Commercial surrogacy is the process in which a woman is paid a fee to carry and deliver a baby to term. Once the baby is delivered, the woman relinquishes all parental rights to the commissioning couple who exclusively raise the child as their own. Altruistic surrogacy, by contrast, is an arrangement where the surrogate receives reimbursement but only for the expenses that she may have incurred during the pregnancy. In this essay I will argue that commercial surrogacy should not be market-inalienable. I will start by outlining Elizabeth Anderson’s argument in “Is Women’s Labor a Commodity?” in which she offers a number of criticisms to commercial surrogacy. I will then outline objections to the argument and highlight how her argument is highly speculative and does not provide an adequate basis for the prohibition of commercial surrogacy.
Baby Business by Insight on SBS had a discussion about surrogacy in relation to a couple that had a baby though surrogacy. In the show it was said that most surrogate mothers have genetically babies, which the mother gives her egg and the father gives his sperm and the doctor inseminates it in the surrogate mother. Most of the everyday people have to the term “renting a womb” towards surrogacy whereas the Women Health Resources
Purdy defends surrogate mothering from a consequentialist point of view. Her case is founded on two premises: firstly, that surrogacy is favourable (that is, it brings about pleasure and reduces pain), and secondly, that the practice is only non-traditional and not morally reprehensible. She thus concludes that "appealing to the sacrosanctity of traditional marriage or of blood ties to prohibit otherwise acceptable practices that would satisfy people 's desires hardly makes sense", and thus, surrogacy should be permissible (Purdy, 1999).
When one or more persons contract with a woman to gestate a child than relinquish that child after birth to the person or couple is known as surrogacy. It is a course of action that goes outside of natural reproduction. For some, it is the only method of having children, extending family. Surrogacy has been stirring up many controversies over the years. Ethics, morals, laws, religious views, etc. have played a major role in the issues that follow the topic of surrogacy. Laws and regulations pertaining to surrogacy vary from state to state. Some states have no enforceable laws
Amie Cullimore, a medical practitioner, filed a child support claim against Michael Ranson, who more than two decades ago donated his sperm to Amie Cullimore, who subsequently conceived two children. Cullimore alleges that throughout the years, Ranson has assumed the role of loco parentis, which means that Ranson has stood in the place of the parent throughout the years. Ranson filed a response that Bill 28, also known as, All Families Are Equal Act, which extinguishes Cullimore`s claim based on the assertion that the surrogate parents who lack an intention to be parents cannot be considered parents in law.
The Marxist criminalization of commercial surrogacy originates from the class divisions produced when the reproductive labors of poor women are exploited by wealthy couples. Because the parties within a surrogacy contract often are not autonomous equals and hold distinct relationships to the means of production, female surrogates unintentionally reinforce class divisions through their participation in womb commodification. However, there are also cases in which surrogates are not drawn from lower economic strata, so the possibility of their labor being “forced” by economic circumstances is attenuated. These include instances of altruistic surrogacy, in which the surrogate is motivated by a desire apart from monetary need, such as a wish to bestow a gift upon the
Deborah L. Spar’s book, The Baby Business, provides an eye opening experience about surrogacy and the selling of eggs without women becoming pregnant. I am surprised to know how people in general and the field of medicine in particular can and has find ways to make the process of procreation possible and a accessible through marketing. Considering the time of Abraham when Sara who longed to have a child asked her husband to give her a child through her maid and claim him/her as her own, was
Laws are legislated and enforced for the mere purpose of protecting all individuals in a society by stating what is and what is not acceptable behavior. Though it is impossible for these legislative decisions to please every single individual in a society, these governs are passed in morality of the thousands of elected parties in charge. Commercial surrogacy is a current complex issue that evokes strong moralistic response. Commercial surrogacy takes away the childbearing element in the reproductive period for individuals looking to have or extend a family. It has opened the doors for many who cannot bear children of their own though this behavior has also raised many concerns about the appropriate scope of the market. This “method for acquiring children” is more commonly objected because the children and women’s reproductive ability are being treated as a commodity. Summed up through Elizabeth S. Anderson’s article, “Is Women’s Labor a Commodity?” children are buyer durables and women are baby factories (Anderson 82). Anderson communicates commercial surrogacy children as commodities stating how this “market” that these children are born into expresses attitude that endorses market norms as opposed to ‘norms of parental love”(Anderson 76). Anderson focuses her paper towards the manipulation, alienation, and exploitation of women that commodifies women’s reproductive capacities. Through Anderson’s argument and her perceptive relations of this market to alienation,
Surrogate mothers are being taken benefit of by intending parents. For example, leaving a child behind due to gender or diseases detected such as Down syndrome. The surrogate mother is left to bring up a child by herself and is not given extra support such as money or she is left with the option of getting an abortion. There have been some exceptions such as the Baby Gammy case where the surrogate mother was told to have an abortion, but she decided to go through with the pregnancy and asked the intending parents to give her an extra amount of money to bring up the baby by herself. Even though this has happened to a surrogate mother, it is rare. Not every surrogate mother goes through this injustice. There are many couples that have gone through surrogacy and introduce their child to their surrogate mother and culture. The point I am trying to make is that this injustice is not common but happens in rare occasions, and due to the act of just a few people, it should not be taken away from the many people who wish to start their own family (with a genetic link) through surrogacy as there are unable to do so due to biological
In today’s society, surrogacy is becoming a more and more popular and common issue. For many couples who cannot or unwilling to carry babies by themselves, surrogacy is the first choice to have their own babies and build a family. The legality of surrogacy is different for every country. There are countries that consider the birth mother as the legal mother while there are those that don't. Besides, a lower price of surrogacy in developing countries drives them to find surrogate mother overseas. Thus, international
On the flipside on the issue, can it not also be viewed that allowing these women to do as they see fit with their bodies as economic empowerment? The money provided to these women can used for various financial means outside of taking care of medical heath care for themselves and the child. The amount provided to each female varies depending on what she and the couple feel is sufficient, therefore any extra monetary compensation can used to help the women relieve themselves from other debts. Autonomy does provide the right that women get to choose their reproductive rights and that includes bearing children for those who cannot do so or for monetary stability. Suggesting that surrogacy dehumanizes her is another form of paternalism. Paternalism limits one’s autonomy for their own good (Pozgar, 2012).
Surrogate Motherhood is something that not many people actually support, even though it “is one of the many reproductive techniques that have enabled infertile couples to have children” (qtd. in Freedman). There are two types of surrogacy, traditional and gestational. The traditional type of surrogacy involves the surrogate mother being (AI) artificially inseminated with the sperm of the intended father or sperm from a donor when the sperm count is low. In either case the surrogate’s own egg will be used. Genetically the surrogate becomes the mother of the resulting child (Storey). Although there are two different types of surrogacy, a traditional surrogacy is rarely seen or done anymore. In gestational surrogacy, the surrogate mother has