Surrogacy Should Not Be Market Inalienable

If a woman concedes to voluntary sexual intercourse, she has incurred a responsibility to care for the fetus, since she is responsible for its existence and subsequent dependence on her body for sustenance. Consequently, she has a moral obligation to sustain it until birth, an obligation that ought to be legally enforced by proscribing abortions. (Manninen 41)

Effective law reform such as The Surrogacy Act 2010 (NSW) has greatly improved the Government responses to issues surrounding Surrogacy. The Act allows for transferral of parentage from the biological mother to the adoptive parents. This allows non-legally binding donor agreements to be considers and accepted, achieving justice for both parties involved in the process. By adapting to social values and accepting modern family structure justice is served for society. When the Surrogacy Act was introduced in March 2011, it becomes illegal to enter a commercial surrogacy agreement oversea in NSW, QLD, ACT, with penalties of up to $100000 or 2 years imprisonment. These penalties are seen in the worse interest for the child, as the child could be without their adoptive parents or grow up in economic hardship due to the fines. Although this is effective as it prohibits commercial surrogacy, as it underlines rights and freedoms under the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), this is mirrored into state legislation to protect the child involved. This is highlighted under article 35 of CRC, where states should take measures to “prevent sale or trafficking of children for any

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

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

Law reform is considered proactive with relation to surrogacy and birth technologies, as methods of conception must be permitted before they are conducted. Surrogacy, which occurs when one woman agrees to fall pregnant and bear a child for a couple, is illegal in NSW when the woman is paid a fee or award, under the Assisted Reproductive Technology Act 2007 (NSW). Hence, surrogacy must be altruistic. Furthermore, the Surrogacy Act 2010 (NSW) now criminalises an international journey for 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

Mary Anne Warren (p.195-196) points out the exceptional circumstances of pregnancy; where one human is entirely biologically reliant on another and where it is impossible for complete personhood rights to not be in conflict between the foetus and the mother. Consider the following case. A mother and an expecting mother both express an intent to kill their child or unborn child respectively. Services are available to take the postnatal children from their mother without affecting her body. Yet to protect the foetus, one would have to imprison the mother until birth, or worse, force a caesarean on her. Warren (193) points out that forced caesareans are not merely a hypothetical

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.

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,

Some view altruistic surrogacy as a form of exploiting the surrogate. There is no monetary compensation to woman placing her health and well-being on the line for another’s benefit. However, it can also be held that the woman knowingly entered into the agreement with full disclosure of the risks and benefits to her health and body. Again, autonomy and justice are extremely prevalent ethical principles to explore when discussing the topic of surrogacy. Same-sex marriage has become a hot topic in the United States in the last few years. The idea of raising a family by homosexual

In 1992, the California legislature decided that the contracts for performance of the services of surrogate motherhood is not contrary to the public consciousness, and therefore passed a bill to permit surrogate motherhood on a commercial basis. State Governor vetoed the bill. A year later, the California Supreme Court ruled that the legal parents of a child born using the method of surrogate motherhood, spouses who have signed a contract for childbearing substitute mother. Thus, in California, has been applied the principle, which was then fixed by law, according to which all rights in respect of a child born by a surrogate mother, provided the genetic parents.

Some states require a contract among all parties to the surrogacy birthing arrangement, and there are often requirements that the contract address certain issues. However, good practice requires that a host of additional issues be addressed in a contract in order to forge a true "meeting of the minds" on what is undoubtedly one of the most personal and complicated of concerted human actions… (Johnson 5.)

Surrogacy is seen as a morally wrong way to use. "Surrogacy will be destructive of intimate relationships by giving birth to the couple's child." (Ozolins, 1998) That is, the surrogate mother is seen as a third person through a marriage that was originally formed by a husband and a wife. On the other hands, the surrogate mothers also have the intimate link with the children. "Since we cannot deny their position and importance to the children, this may cause the problem of self-identity to the kids because the children may be confused that who their real mother is." (Ozolins, 1998) If we treat the surrogate mother as a person ,and then we take the children away, it may exploit her right to own. Accordingly, it might cause the surrogate mothers' psychological problems. How do they feel when the kids that they give birth to are taken away and how do they overcome the mood?