Britain's most prolific surrogate mum 'pregnant' with 16th and 17th babies

Britain's most prolific surrogate mum is hoping to have another baby - after already giving birth to 15 babies.

Carole Horlock, 48, revealed the news to the Mail that she has been implanted with two embryos from a couple who are desperate to be parents.

The embryos were transferred to her womb at the weekend – just a few hours after Carole met the parents-to-be for the first time.

However, it will take up to two weeks before doctors know if either of the embryos has successfully embedded.

Carole has two daughters of her own, Steffanie, 24, and Megan, 21, and has given birth to 13 other children as a surrogate mother – including a set of twins and a set of triplets.

She last gave birth in April 2013 – to a boy weighing 9lb 14oz.

In an exclusive interview with the paper, she said: "At the time I said he was going to be my last, but having babies is addictive.

"The thought I could be pregnant again is incredibly exciting – it's the beginning of a journey with the couple which culminates in a magical moment when I give birth."

Carole, who lives in Colchester, Essex, with her partner of 16 years, Paul, approached the latest couple on an internet surrogacy forum last Monday and met them on Friday night, before having the IVF treatment on Saturday morning.

Carole said: "I'm just a womb they've hired to help them achieve their dream of being parents. As far as I'm concerned it's their baby not mine.

"I know in my heart I've made the right decision to approach a mum who is desperate to have a baby of her own, and I'm confident that they'll be good parents."

Carole said: "Some people may think that what I'm doing is wrong, as I'd only met the couple in the flesh just 12 hours before having the IVF, but I don't believe it is at all.

"Ideally, I would have spent more time getting to know them. There wouldn't normally be such a rush, but I'd been having this treatment for another couple who pulled out of the surrogacy with no real reason, which has left me devastated.

"I didn't want to lose out on the chance to have another surrogate baby for a couple, as I'm now 48 years old. And it seemed such a wasted opportunity when I could use my womb again to help others."

She added: "I love being pregnant, although I hope it is just one this time. With two embryos there is a chance it could be twins. And I really don't want to contemplate triplets or quads at my age – I've done triplets once and that was enough!"
It's almost 20 years since Carole became pregnant with her first child for another couple after reading a newspaper article about surrogacy.

She went on to have twins in February 1997, triplets in March 2008 and other babies in March 1998, July 1999, October 2000, January 2002, April 2003, June 2004 and April 2013. For each pregnancy, she is paid expenses of between £7,000 and £15,000.

Sources: http://www.parentdish.co.uk/2015/03/16/britains-most-prolific-surrogate-mum-pregnant-with-16th-and-17th-babies-carole-horlock/

Twins born to surrogacy in Ukraine

A High Court Judge has granted parental orders to a couple who commissioned the birth of twins in Ukraine.

In RS v T, the couple concerned had been married for 38 years and were both in their 60s. More than 20 years previously the woman had undergone IVF treatment in an attempt to have a child but this was unsuccessful and the couple decided to explore surrogacy as an alternative.

But it was not until 2012 that they decided to proceed with surrogacy and entered an arrangement with a commercial clinic in Ukraine, paying a fee of EUR 26,000 (£18,520) plus a supplement of EUR 5000 (£3,562)when the surrogate mother became pregnant with twins.

The current period of civil unrest in Ukraine began around the time the twins were born and the couple were therefore stranded in the country for several months.

While still in Ukraine, the couple asked the surrogate mother to signdeclarations stating that she agreed to the children being brought to the UK and to giving up her parental rights.

The commissioning couple have now returned to the UK with the twins. In February they applied for the parental order, transferring to them the status of parents to the twins. Under English law, the birth mother of surrogate children is their legal mother unless and until this status is transferred by the courts.

However, the couple ran into difficulties demonstrating the amount of money which had been paid to the surrogate mother, and were also unable to contact her in order to serve her with notice of the proceedings.

In the Family Court sitting at Canterbury, Mrs Justice Theis explained:
“The applicants invite the court to dispense with the need for the respondent to be served, as they submit they have taken reasonable steps to try and locate her. The evidence demonstrates that the only other method left to seek to contact her would be by way of notification in the media to try and locate where she is.”

The Judge said the documents signed by the surrogate mother while the couple were still in Ukraine were not sufficiently detailed to demonstrate that the birth mother had fully consented under the relevant legislation. On the other hand, she also believed that the couple had taken all reasonable steps to find the mother and the Judge decided that it would not be sensible for the couple to purse the possibility of trying to contact the mother through the media given the “very sensitive subject” and the unrest in the region.

Mrs Justice Theis authorised the payments made by the couple, saying the couple had “acted in good faith” and not sought to conceal the sums paid. Payments made to foreign clinics and surrogate mothers must be authorised by the family courts when granting parental orders because commercial surrogacy is illegal in the UK.

Noting that some of the difficulties encountered by the couple could have been avoided if they had taken specialist legal advice, she turned to the question of the couple’s age. They had no health concerns and a Cafcass officer had approved the granting of a parental order after interviewing them. However, the officer did stress the importance of the couple making arrangements for the children in the event that they became unable to care for them.

The Judge concluded that the twins’ welfare required “the position with their current carers to be secured in a way that provides lifelong security.”

Sources: http://www.marilynstowe.co.uk/2015/03/16/twins-born-to-surrogacy-in-ukraine/

Mom’s the word

WOMEN are the key decision maker for almost all purchases in a home. And when it comes to selling products to children, it is the mother who has to be convinced first. No wonder that Dentsu India Network has launched a full-fledged division to understand what makes Indian women, and especially mothers,  trust a particular brand while saying ‘no’ to others.

Launched just two days before International Women’s Day this year, Dentsu Mama Lab is an ode to all the mothers in the country, says Rohit Ohri, executive chairman, Dentsu India and CEO Dentsu APAC. The newly launched division of the group aims at bringing brands and mothers closer through various solutions. “It all began three years back with the launch of Mama Lab in Tokyo. While the lab is still under operation in Tokyo, with the launch in India, the idea is to turn it into a solutions division than just being a planning or research room. We want to take insights from the lab to brands and help them to target moms,” added Ohri.

This is not the first time that the Japan based agency has launched a division targetted at a special section of consumers, it also runs Dentsu Diversity Lab apart from Dentsu Innovation Lab in Japan. In fact, the Japanese advertising giant spends $35 million annually on funding innovative ideas in its various labs.

For Swati Bhattacharya, who has been roped in as principal partner, Mama Lab, Creative Dentsu, the new division’s mojo comes from knowing and understanding the Indian mother. “We will work towards solving brands’ problems with the knowledge of the users. For instance, we may create an app on behalf of a diaper brand for the needs of mothers when they are flying,” she added.

For both Ohri and Bhattacharyya, the new division will not function like a regular agency that participates in a pitch process to win new businesses. Rather the focus will be to take insights derived out of studies to brands and help them create solutions targetted at Indian mothers.

“For instance, one of the ways to increase in-home consumption of beverages is by talking to the mothers as no 18-year-old is responsible for buying products for their homes,” added Ohri.

Moreover, with the new division the advertising network is looking at debunking myths surrounding Indian mothers. “A study recently conducted by us shows that the Indian mother is not the ‘mother India’ she is portrayed on screen most of the time, rather she is a woman with a vision and aim and wants everyone to recognise her abilities. Through our various we want to put forward this idea,” said Narayan Devanathan, EVP and national planning director, Dentsu.

As the first step, Bhattacharya and her team has created their very first campaign celebrating different facets of motherhood. Launched on International Women’s Day, the campaign told the story of a surrogate mother, who sold her baby in order to raise her daughter.

Sources: http://www.financialexpress.com/article/industry/companies/moms-the-word/54334/

LEGENDARY GAY DESIGNERS OPPOSE GAY MARRIAGE, GAY PARENTING, SURROGACY

Domenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana, founders of the eponymous fashion house, have come out strongly against gay marriage, the notion of gay families, and the use of surrogacy to procreate.

The billionaire pair, who used to be romantically linked, gave an interview with the Italian magazine Panorama, in which they said, “The only family is the traditional one. No chemical offspring and rented uterus. Life has a natural flow; there are things that cannot be changed.”

They also said, “Procreation must be an act of love.”

“I call children of chemistry, synthetic children. Uteri for rent, semen chosen from a catalogue,” Dolce stated.

Gabanna said, “The family is not a fad. In it there is a supernatural sense of belonging.”

The pair have long been outspoken about gay marriage. In 2013, when the London Telegraph asked them if they had ever considered getting married, they answered, “What? Never!” Dolce said, “I’m a practicing Catholic.”

Gabbana told the Daily Mail in 2006, “I am opposed to the idea of a child growing up with two gay parents.”

LGBTNews in Italy is already calling for a boycott of Dolce and Gabbana.

It is not unusual for gay men in Europe to oppose gay marriage. In fact, a group of gay men in France, calling themselves Les Hommen, have been an ongoing feature of traditional marriage protests in France. Les Hommen invaded the French Open, stripped to the waist, with pro-marriage slogans written on their chests. Gay Star News suggested it was “the most homoerotic anti-gay protest ever.”

Sources: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/03/14/legendary-gay-designers-oppose-gay-marriage-gay-parenting-surrogacy/

Doncaster mum gives birth to gay son’s baby

Andrew McCaren/Ross Parry Picture shows Kyle Casson from Skellow in Doncaster. Anne Marrie Casson has become a surogate for her gay sone Kyle the little boy miles was born last year at full term and is now eight months old. Thje process at a private IVF clinic cost between $12000 & $14000.

A Doncaster mum has given birth to her gay son’s baby - after he told her he was desperate to become a father.

Kyle Casson, 27, picked his mum Anne-Marie, 46, to become a surrogate and carry his son Miles, now eight months old, in what is thought to be the first case of its kind in the UK.

Mrs Casson, who lives in Intake with her husband Alan became pregnant with a donor egg fertilised by the sperm of her son.

He is understood to be the first single man to have a child through surrogacy in Britain and the first to use his own mother as a surrogate.

The arrangement emerged after a High Court judge ruled that Mr Casson can now adopt the baby and become his legal father - even though he is also the tot’s brother in the eyes of the law.

Mrs Casson, of Lakeen Road, told a national newspaper she felt compelled to help her son, a supermarket worker from Skellow, have a baby and said: “When he first came to me, I thought ‘I could do it.’ Some people when they did find out said ‘urgh’ but they don’t understand.

“He is not biologically tied to me, other than he’s my grandson. I love being a parent and for Kyle to experience that, I would do that for him.”

Mrs Casson stepped in after another female relative who had initially been lined up to be a surrogate mum found she was unable to do it.

Because he is single, Mr Casson was turned away by surrogacy clinics across the country. While it is not illegal for single parents to enter into a surrogacy arrangement, the law prevents them from applying for an order that they need to legally raise their child in the UK.

Rules stipulate that a surrogate mother must hand a child over to two parents, usually a couple in “an enduring family relationship.”

But judge Mrs Justice Theis ruled last week that the adoption would not break the law because the baby and its father are legally related as brothers.

The process at a private IVF clinic cost between £12,000 and £14,000 and Mrs Casson gave birth to Miles last July by caeserean section.

Speaking publicly for the first time, Mr Casson said: “I understand that not everyone will agree with it, but they can have their opinions. I have a son and I am very happy. As long as people can provide a home and they have the support, I don’t see why anyone should be denied the right to be a parent. “Regardless of sexuality, gender, as long as you can provide for the child, I don’t see what the problem is.”

He added that he will explain his son’s unusual upbringing when he is older and added: “I am never going to lie to him. We will tell him at appropriate stages in his life, you have to be truthful. There is no other way.”

Mrs Casson’s husband Alan - Kyle’s stepdad - is the legal father - as he consented to the pregnancy and both are named on Miles’s birth certificate.

Kyle has younger twin brothers and was four when his mum separated from his biological dad. She went onto marry Mr Casson who adopted the boys and has raised them as his own.

He added that when Miles was born he cried and added: “I could not believe it. I did not now what he would look like because you do not know the donor, but people say he looks like me.”

He will return to work next month with Mrs Casson taking up childcare duties.

Sources: http://www.southyorkshiretimes.co.uk/news/local/doncaster-mum-gives-birth-to-gay-son-s-baby-1-7155580

Woman Gets Addicted To Giving Birth, Becomes Surrogate Till Her ‘Womb Falls Out’

Tara Sawyer claims that she has gotten addicted to being pregnant. She says that she enjoys giving birth so much that she is now offering her services as a surrogate for free just because she wants a baby in her belly so badly.

She already has been pregnant over 7 times, 4 of which were her own children and the rest were others. She says that she loves pregnancy so much that she is willing to get pregnant as many times as she could until her "womb falls out."

If she is willing to get pregnant so many times, then we guess that she might actually be able to break the Duggar family record of 19 kids.

Tara says that she does not do this for the children. In fact, she says that she does not feel any emotions while giving away the child. Her first surrogate child two years ago was actually her own biological daughter and she said that she had no problems handing her over to her adoptive family.

She says that she is always in a huge rush because she feels her best when she is pregnant. She even claims that being pregnant makes her body much better in shape.

According to Elite Daily, Tara says that "It is an amazing feeling to hand over a child to someone who desperately wants it, and I feel at my best whilst pregnant."

While some might think that this type of addiction is still better than other types of addictions such as drug abuse, food, etc. But we still think that it is creepy that she is even refusing the 15,000 British pounds per pregnancy that she is legally obliged to as a surrogate mom.

But, at the end of the day, as long as there are no strings and no harm done to the baby during the pregnancy, for some people, this might be a great thing. There is no harm in giving back to the community. 

Tara has complete support of her family including her husband Matt. He says that they both have talked about it and Tara being a surrogate mother brings them even closer as a couple.

Sources: http://www.sciencetimes.com/articles/4009/20150313/woman-gets-addicted-to-giving-birth-becomes-surrogate-till-her-womb-falls-out.htm

More infertile Chinese couples seeking surrogacy in US

An illustration of surrogate motherhood. (Illustration/CFP)

With surrogacy banned in China, more and more infertile and same sex couples in China are considering having children through surrogates in the United States, the China Business News reported.

"Linda" was 36 when she first went to America in 2009 to consult a surrogacy agency in California. She finally realized her dream of becoming a mother at 40, and her son is now two years old.

Based on her successful experience, Linda established a consulting firm to provide assistance to couples having the same problem as she did.

Linda told the China Business News that surrogacy consulting service providers in China do not advertise their business in a big way. They usually hold small-sized promotional events to solicit customers.

These companies are responsible for communicating with medical institutions, insurers, surrogacy brokers, sperm banks and egg banks in the United States. If needed, they can also assign people to accompany their customers to America to help them resolve various problems.

"We usually arrange everything for customers. Every customer is usually dealt with for one to two years and is charged between 70,000-90,000 Chinese yuan (US$11,200-$14,400)," she said.

In the US, commercial surrogacy is legal in Oregon and California but is banned in Washington DC, New York, New Jersey, Michigan and Washington.

Medical institutions in the United States usually charge US$30,000-$50,000 for their services, which involves creating an embryo using the sperm and egg of the intended parents before transferring it to the ovary of the surrogate mother.

If the female half of the couple cannot produce eggs, or in the case of same sex couples, an extra 50,000-100,000 yuan (US$8,000-$16,000) is required to buy eggs from an egg bank.

Surrogacy brokers are responsible for selecting surrogate mothers for the intended parents. The brokers are also responsible for managing and communicating with the surrogate mothers after they become pregnant.

Surrogacy brokers and surrogate mothers are each paid about US$30,000 in each case.

Sources: http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?id=20150313000117&cid=1103

Friendship more than survives surrogacy ordeal: Porter

When Leslie Solomonian offered to carry a fetus for her friend Sofia Grebius, neither woman knew how hard it would be.

Moments before her first baby was born, Sofia Grebius remembers the midwife asking two questions: “Are you ready?” and “Is your friendship going to survive this?”

The friendship in question was with Leslie Solomonian, a woman Sofia has considered kindred for two decades.

Leslie was giving birth to her baby.

“I was so surprised by that second question,” says Sofia, looking over at Leslie with tears in her eyes. “I never felt that.”

Friendships are built through shared experiences: canoe trips, picnics, soccer games, work projects. Sofia and Leslie’s “project” was on a higher stratosphere. It was to make a baby.

Sofia, a 37-year-old Swedish entrepreneur, wanted to be a mother desperately, but couldn’t deliver her own child. She lost her uterus, though not her ovaries, to cervical cancer six years ago.

Leslie already had two children. Her pregnancies had been easy, enjoyable even. Four winters ago, while driving to an inn in the Kawarthas for a girls’ getaway, she offered to be Sofia’s surrogate.

“You were quiet after that,” says Leslie, a naturopathic doctor and professor. “It took you a long time to think about it.”

The two are unlikely friends. They grew up on different sides of the globe: Sofia in Sweden and Laos; Leslie in Kitchener and later Toronto.

They met 20 years ago, when they were both nervous 17-year-old students arriving in Japan for a yearlong student exchange. Neither spoke Japanese. They both felt painfully obtrusive, acutely alone and desperately homesick. (This was before the invention of email.)

That year, they became each other’s family.

When Leslie competed in a triathlon, “Sofia rode her bike beside me while I ran, cheering me on and pouring water over my head.” She describes Sofia as loving and loyal.

For Sofia, Leslie’s trademark qualities were strength and a full-mouthed relish of life.

After that year, they returned to their own continents, keeping in touch only sporadically.

But, their spirits were glued.

Leslie wept when Sofia broke the new about her cancer over Skype. They talked too about her longing to have a baby and the walls she was slamming into.

Local adoption is rare in Sweden. Sofia put her name on international adoption lists, but her cancer history disqualified her in many cases. As for surrogacy, it is not permitted in Sweden.

In Canada, only altruistic surrogacy is legal under the Assisted Human Reproduction Act.

You can’t pay a woman to carry your baby for you. It has to be a gift.

It was the biggest gift Leslie has ever offered anyone, she admits. But, at first, she didn’t think it was a big deal. She was simply loaning out her uterus. She figured her life would otherwise continue as normal.

When Sofia came to Toronto in the fall of 2013 for the first attempted embryo transfer, Leslie insisted that she and her boyfriend, Peter Blom — the baby’s intended father — stay in her small apartment. She threw them a party.

“I assumed it would work the first time and it would be easy,” says Leslie.

Sofia overflowed with anxiety and anticipation. She’d been working up to this moment for years. For her, it was a titanic deal. She remembers the walk to the fertility clinic like this: “I was exploding inside. I wanted to cry. I was concentrating on breathing.”

The procedure didn’t work the first time. Or the second or third. Every attempt, Leslie had to be induced into menopause, then jacked full of estrogen and progesterone so her uterus was ripe. She had hot flashes, and violent emotional swings.

For Sofia, the “project” meant repeated cross-Atlantic trips. She had to jab her belly with needles to jolt her ovaries into high production. The egg extraction operations triggered frightening flashbacks to her cancer surgeries.

The “project” has unfolded over four years. During that time, Leslie’s marriage ended and Sofia and her former boyfriend broke up. She started dating Peter a few months before the first scheduled appointment at the fertility clinic. Up till then, she was going to use donated sperm.

The pressure on Peter was extreme. Did he want to be a father? Once he decided yes, the pressure transferred to his just-forming relationship with Leslie. It’s hard to become soul mates on command.

“Someone I didn’t know was doing this insanely emotional, intimate thing for us,” Peter says.

Finally, last June, the embryo embedded in Leslie’s uterine wall successfully. It was their fourth and final try.

Sofia and Peter did not come to the clinic that day, though they were in Toronto. Leslie had asked for some privacy.

Having a baby together is hard on marriages. It’s also hard on friendships, it turns out.
“Knowing how big this was for you emotionally and feeling the weight of that — it was too much to carry,” Leslie says in tears.

It wasn’t just her uterus but her identity she felt she’d loaned to the “project.” Few people notice a pregnant belly without commenting on it. Leslie was forever explaining herself. She felt more pregnant than she had with her own children, precisely because she wasn’t carrying her own child.

“I needed boundaries to live my regular life. I have relationships to foster, kids to look after, my job. I needed space.”

The weight of that distance felt leaden to Sofia. She worried more about her friend than she did about her growing baby.

“My friend was not feeling well. I didn’t know how to help,” she says.

Early the morning of March 1, Leslie’s water broke. She let Sofia know and texted her that afternoon when she was enroute to the Toronto Birth Centre in Regent Park.

Forty minutes after they all arrived, Leslie gave birth to a little boy. He was heaved up onto her bare chest until his umbilical cord was cut, and then he was passed into the trembling arms of his mother.

Sofia calls that experience “pure magic.”

“I felt lighter,” says Leslie.

So, what was their answer to the midwife: Will friendship survive this?

Both respond with an emphatic “Yes.”

All the things Leslie loved about her friend — compassion and loyalty — came into sharp focus again.

“We’ve just gotten to know each other deeper,” says Sofia.

She and Peter have named their son Astor Ontario Q Axel Joe Blom Grebius.

“We were worried those were too many names. But then, why not just give him them all?” says Sofia. “There were so many people involved in him being here.”

Sources:http://www.thestar.com/news/world/2015/03/13/friendship-more-than-survives-surrogacy-ordeal-porter.html

SI is closed on 14th March, 2015

SI will not be working tomorrow (i.e.14th March, 2015) hence there could be delay in reply to the emails.
However, you may always give us a call in an emergency situation.

Sherri Shepherd, Lamar Sally Surrogacy Drama Continues in Court

Sherri Shepherd and Lamar Sally will soon find out who’ll be ruled the official mother of their baby boy born to a surrogate last August, reports Radar Online.

A Pennsylvania judge continued a custody hearing Wednesday to determine the baby’s legal mother (Shepherd, the surrogate or the egg donor).

Though Shepherd has yet to testify, ex husband Sally has revealed that the former host of “The View” does not wish to be considered the now 7-month-old’s mother. Sally claims Shepherd had changed her mind after the surrogate was heavily pregnant, and following the couple’s split in 2014, no longer wanted to be associated with the child.

While the surrogate, Jessica Bartholomew, is considered the child’s mother on his birth certificate, she is equally unenthused.

“I’m just frustrated that I’m the mother of the baby, but hopefully when we come back again all that will change,” she told People Magazine after leaving court on Wednesday.

Meanwhile Reproductive Possibilities, who Sally and Shepherd used to arrange the process in the first place, have been attending court as well, concerned that their reputable company will be tainted after the ordeal.

“Our office has done 200 of these [a year] and this is the first time we’ve had this happen,” attorney Melissa B. Brisman, representing the company, said. “It’s usually the intended parents who are afraid that the carrier may want to keep the baby.”

“It’s an unusual circumstance where you have someone who came into a relationship and then doesn’t want the baby,” she continued.

“It’s heartbreaking, actually, very heartbreaking,” Sally, who testified at the hearing on Wednesday, shared.

Sally currently has custody of the baby.

Sources: http://www.eurweb.com/2015/03/sherry-shepherd-lamar-sally-surrogacy-drama-continues-in-court/

Surrogacy helps many eke out their livelihood

Lakshmi, a 25-year-old from the city, is due to deliver in a week. Her husband runs a small business, which gets him around `500 a day. They have two children and she says that to secure their future and provide them education, she chose surrogacy.

“My family and in-laws know about it and they are very supportive. My husband and kids visit me regularly at the centre,” said Ms Lakshmi, who is elated that she will soon rejoin her family.

Farheen, a single mother from the city took to surrogacy after her husband died. Though initially reluctant, she took up surrogacy due to her financial problems. She gave birth to a boy on Monday and the baby has already been given to his parents.

When asked if she would become a surrogate mother once again, Ms Farheen said, “If I get a chance, I will. This not only gives me financial support, but also makes me happy as I am helping someone who can’t have kids.”

Like Lakshmi and Farheen, most women who choose surrogacy are those who didn’t have a chance to complete their schooling and see this as a way out of their financial problems.

Though fertility clinics quote different figures, a surrogate mother earns   `2-3 lakh for renting out her womb. As per data collated from major fertility clinics across Hyderabad, currently, there are at least 100 pregnant surrogates in the city. Another 150 are willing to be surrogates.

A positive trend that doctors note is that, surrogate mothers and couples opting for commercial surrogacy are shedding the stigma attached to it.

“Currently, our centre has 80 carrying surrogates. The numbers have improved over the last few years. Reasons for this can be that availability of surrogates has improved and also that  awareness about the procedure has increased. The stigma has definitely come down,” said M. Divakar Reddy, managing director of Dr Padmaja Fertility Centre.

A couple from Kolkata opted for Hyderabad because of “affordability and higher success rates”. For a couple opting for surrogacy, it might cost any where between `5 and `10 lakh, depending on the clinic and availability of surrogates.

Activists call surrogacy exploitation of women

While the number of couples opting for commercial surrogacy and women willing to be surrogates on the rise, activists from the city say that surrogacy is an exploitative procedure and that there are only guidelines and no laws in place yet to protect their rights.

A 2012 study on commercial surrogacy taken up by the Delhi-based Sama, a resource group for women and health, stated that commercial surrogacy was a $400 million industry in India. Khalida Parveen, a women’s rights activist and member of the Welfare Party of India, said that she will not encourage women to go for surrogacy due to religious reasons and also because of the chances of exploitation. “Even if a woman is paid, the concept is exploitative by its very nature and is against motherhood,” said Ms Parveen.

Dr Samit Sekhar, executive director at Hyd-erabad’s Kiran Infertility Centre, however, brushed aside the fears. “There are very strict guidelines put down by the Indian Council of Medical Research. If these are flouted the clinic will be barred from providing services.”

Sources: http://www.deccanchronicle.com/150313/nation-current-affairs/article/surrogacy-helps-many-eke-out-their-livelihood

B v C (Surrogacy: Adoption) [2015] EWFC 17

Surrogacy – Adoption – Child born via surrogacy arrangement with man’s mother – HFEA 2008, s 54 – Whether an adoption order should be made in the man’s favour

An adoption order was made in respect of a 7-month-old child who was born by way of a surrogacy arrangement between the man and his mother.

The 7-month-old child was born as a surrogacy arrangement whereby the single man’s mother agreed to be the gestational carrier for child conceived using the man’s sperm and a donor egg. The mother’s husband fully supported the agreement.

Implantation of the embryos only took place after the parties had counselling and all treatment was undertaken by a fertility clinic licensed by the HFEA.

The legal parents of the child were the mother and her husband. Pursuant to s 54 of the HFEA 2008 a parental order could not be granted in favour of the man because he was not in an enduring family relationship, marriage or civil partnership. He was, however, able to apply for an adoption order subject to the provisions of s 92 of the Adoption and Children Act 2002 by virtue of s 51(1) of the Act.

The man had already been granted leave under s 42(6) of the ACA 2002 for permission to apply for an adoption order before the child had lived with him for 3 years.

Detailed reports had been prepared for the hearing and supported the adoption order being made. The child had reportedly formed a secure attachment with the man who understood the need to explain how the child was born to him at an appropriate stage of his development.

It was clear that the family had thought carefully about the arrangement and sought appropriate advice. The strength of the familial relationships and the consequent support they would provide in the future would ensure that the child’s lifelong welfare needs were met. An adoption order was granted.

Sources: http://www.familylaw.co.uk/news_and_comment/b-v-c-surrogacy-adoption-2015-ewfc-17#.VQE4KXyUfOw

Amidst Its Highest-Ever Success Rates, CT Fertility Adds Next Generation DNA Sequencing as a Standard Feature of Its Unlimited IVF and Egg Donation Package

Anchored by cutting-edge technology and highly experienced embryologists, CT Fertility is now offering risk-free, deeply discounted same-day Pre-Implantation Genetic Screening (PGS) as part of its flat-fee unlimited IVF package.

CT Fertility has announced pregnancy rates for 2014 that place it among the most successful fertility centers in the United States. In 2014 84% of fresh IVF transfers involving egg donors and gestational carriers resulted in clinical pregnancies, an increase from 81% in 2013, and 78% in 2012 (see chart). This was also recently reported by the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technologies (SART) in their official IVF success rates data for 2013, which ranks CT Fertility as the 12th most successful fertility clinic in the USA. However since SART does not track cases which combine egg donation and surrogacy, CT Fertility's Top 12 ranking is shown for fresh embryo transfers with an egg donor.

The improved results are in part due to the growing use of Preimplantation Genetic Screening (PGS) which is being increasingly used to exclude chromosome abnormalities that lead to reduced implantation rates and/or increase the likelihood of miscarriages. To help more of their clients take advantage of this technology, and staying true to their desire to put a strict ceiling on potential costs, CT Fertility announced an enhanced unlimited IVF package that now includes as a standard feature the use of Next Generation DNA Sequencing, the most advanced PGS technique.

CT Fertility is one of the first among a small group of pioneering fertility centers to use Next Gen Sequencing to distinguish chromosomally normal embryos from nonviable and diseased ones. “Previously, decisions regarding which embryos to transfer were either based on crude visual progress assessment, or less evolved PGS techniques that presented undesirable trade-offs,” said Dr. Michael Doyle, the medical director of CT Fertility. “For example, those techniques were associated with some risk of harming the embryos, the risk of false-positive results that lead to discarding usable embryos, or the need to forgo fresh embryo transfers due to the long time required get the DNA test result,” he said. “Now we can consider those risks insignificant, especially when our highly experienced embryologists are performing the biopsy using technology that allows us to take a sample cell from the shell of the embryo, and not the fetal component. Furthermore, since CT Fertility is one of very few clinics performing same day Next Gen Sequencing and getting the results back within 24 hours, we never have to unnecessarily freeze all the embryos before the transfer.”

In addition to reducing the risks and compromises previously associated with PGS, CT Fertility reduced the associated costs by discounting the entire process by 20% (from $6250 to $5000) starting March 1, 2015. In addition, by adding Next Gen Sequencing as a standard feature to its popular unlimited surrogacy and egg donation package for only $3000 (which is less than 50% of the previous PGS fee), clients are paying less for enhanced services. Specifically, in the unlimited plan prospective parents pay a one-time, transparent fee that includes all associated costs for an unlimited number of IVF and embryo transfers (fresh or frozen) until they are successful. The $47,900 package is comprised of a $26,500 fee for all medical and FDA screenings and IVF treatments (as many as needed for a successful pregnancy) and now includes Next Gen PGS; $11,450 for the egg donor including her stipend, screening, clinical services, matching and associated fees; and $9,950 for all third party costs, including medications needed for both the donor and surrogate during the process and into the first trimester of the pregnancy. “We know that even with our highly promising pregnancy rates, there are still inherent uncertainties in the IVF and egg donation process, and we would like to give our clients full peace of mind and protection from those often hidden associated costs,” said Dr. Doyle. “The way we do this is by disclosing all costs up-front, with complete transparency, and not adding extra medical or IVF costs later on should additional treatments be required.”

Unlike most packages of this type offered by other clinics, CT Fertility imposes no restrictions on people who wish to only transfer one embryo at a time, so that parents who choose to be conservative because they wish to avoid twins are not penalized. Indeed CT Fertility has seen a growing number of intended parents who are opting to transfer only one embryo at a time, either on their first journey, or when they come back for a sibling. For these parents the combinations of PGS and an unlimited IVF plan can be especially beneficial since pregnancy rates for a single embryo transfer are lower compared to the rates when two embryos are transferred.

“These announcements are in step with our motto of ‘your family, your way’ – the commitment to give prospective parents who need IVF, donated eggs and/or surrogacy-related services more choice and control in creating the family that is right for them, at the lowest possible financial and emotional costs,” said Dr. Doyle.

Along the new enhanced unlimited IVF package, the clinic will continue to provide several of its unique program features. These include the wide availability of fully screened known egg donors, a guarantee for a minimum number of eggs across all applicable options, as well as automatic access to back-up eggs when needed (at no additional cost) —features which CT Fertility is uniquely positioned to offer due to its advanced egg-freezing capabilities. For prospective parents who do not opt for the unlimited plan, and are not successful on their first try, the clinic will continue with the policy of discounting subsequent frozen embryo transfers until they have a baby or run out of embryos.

Sources: http://www.prweb.com/releases/ct_fertility-surrogacy/rates-pgs-unlimited-plan/prweb12568623.htm

Govt working on bill to regulate surrogacy

New Delhi: The government is "working" on finalising a bill which will regulate assisted reproduction like surrogacy, the Rajya Sabha was told on Tuesday.

The Indian Council Medical Research (ICMR) is revising the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Bill, Minister of State for Health Shripad Yesso Naik said.

"The government is working on finalising Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Bill which also covers surrogacy," he said in a written reply in Rajya Sabha.

He said that during inter-ministerial consultation some ministries and departments submitted their comments which were considered by the Department of Health Research (DHR) in consultation with Ministry of Law and Justice.

"The ICMR is revising the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Bill, based on these comments," he said.

As per reports, the bill seeks to address issues like how many pregnancies can be allowed for a surrogate mother, the age of the mother and due compensation to be paid to her.

The bill will also allow single parents to have children through surrogates. The bill states that health insurance and regular tests will be made mandatory for surrogates, as per reports.

Sources: http://zeenews.india.com/news/india/govt-working-on-bill-to-regulate-surrogacy_1559253.html

Canadian Law Will Soon Recognize Surrogacy Contracts

Every child has a right. However, this code covers children who were born with at least one parent recognizing the birth. How about children born by surrogate mothers? This is the concern expressed by lawyer Alain Roy, head of the committee lobbying for surrogacy law in Quebec, Canada.

Surrogacy or the carrying of pregnancy for intended parents is legal in Canada. There are two types of surrogacy: gestational and traditional.

Gestational surrogacy refers to a pregnancy through IVF or the transferring of the embryo by biological parents to the womb of the surrogate mother. Traditional surrogacy refers to natural or artificial impregnation of the surrogate resulting to an offspring with genetic relations to the surrogate.

Partners sought for surrogacy when pregnancy is difficult or medically impossible.

While surrogacy is legal, the act of paying the surrogate mother is not yet legalized. Quebec Civil Code Article 541 states: “Any agreement whereby a woman undertakes to procreate or carry a child for another person is absolutely null.”

Roy argued about the responsibilities entailed in such an undertaking as surrogacy. Who would be responsible for the child? What happens when the child is born with defect? Who would take care of the child? He cited a case in point: a baby born with Down Syndrome. “If we don’t recognize the contract, that means that the surrogate mother will bring a baby with [Down Syndrome] into the world, and the intended parents are not responsible,” Roy said.

He wanted to establish a legal framework to support social realities that continue to reshape and redefine the way we look at relationships and family ties.

The committee is hoping to present their case to Canada’s Supreme Court this spring.

Sources: http://www.healthaim.com/canadian-law-will-soon-recognize-surrogacy-contracts/15825

His brother’s dad: U.K. agog after mother acts as surrogate for her son, giving birth to her own grandchild

A British mother has helped her 24-year-old son become a father by carrying his child as a surrogate. In the procedure, the first of its kind, Anne-Marie Casson, 46, became pregnant using a donor egg fertilized by her son Kyle’s sperm.

Kyle, gay and single, had wanted to be a father “for some considerable time.” After surrogacy clinics across the country turned him away, and a female relative who had volunteered to be the carrier developed medical difficulties, Ms. Casson and her husband, Alan, decided she should step in and be the surrogate mother.

A family court judge ruled the situation was “entirely lawful” and Kyle has been allowed to adopt the baby — his son but also, legally, his brother.

Lawyers point out that family members are increasingly acting as surrogates in the U.K., but the Cassons’ case is unique: Kyle is the first single man in the country to have a child through surrogacy and the first to use his mother as the carrier. “I cried and cried,” said Kyle, describing his happiness at his son Miles’s birth. “I could not believe it.”

The Cassons’ case has ignited huge controversy: the procedure may have taken place in the sterile surroundings of an IVF lab, but the participants’ consanguinity raises the spectre of one of the few remaining taboos — incest. Twitter reaction to the story ranged from “nothing wrong with this” to “gross,” “disgusting” and “selfish.”

Robert Flello, Labour MP for Stoke-on-Trent South, spoke of his “many concerns and worries” about the case.

Jill Kirby, a social policy analyst, finds it “very disturbing that any mother would consider it healthy or appropriate to give birth to her son’s child. What is even more worrying is that the High Court has granted the son an adoption order, partly based on the ‘closeness’ of the relationship between the family members involved.”

Ms. Casson countered these attacks by pointing out that Miles “is not biologically tied to me, other than he’s my grandson. I love being a parent and for Kyle to experience that. I would do this for him.” She and Kyle have said that friends have been overwhelmingly supportive.

Lawyer Natalie Gamble, whose firm was involved in the Cassons’ case, said surrogacy using close family members has become commonplace.

“We have seen many instances where sisters, brothers-in-law, cousins, help one another out in this fashion,” she says.

“It is difficult to speak of precise numbers, but U.K. law, which does not permit advertising for a surrogate or for a surrogate to offer her services, is pushing couples to look among family members for surrogacy.”

For Ms. Gamble, the only issue raised by the Cassons’ case is a legal one. “U.K. law does not allow singles, like the son [Kyle] in this case, to apply for a parental order, or birth certificate; so the young man had to apply for an adoption order instead,” she says.

‘I love being a parent and for Kyle to experience that. I would do this for him’

She is campaigning to change the law, which she says condemns children to forfeit “a U.K. birth certificate which reflects their true parentage, and instead must either become adopted children, or live in limbo without resolved legal status.”

A report described how baby Miles, now eight months old, “clearly has formulated a secure attachment to the father,” adding: “The father understands that the child will need to know about how he was conceived and feels that he will utilize the security of the family structure to support his son in understanding that he is a very much wanted child.”

The Cassons’ case has set a precedent. More and more unconventional conceptions like theirs are likely to ensue.

“I did not choose to be gay. I was born that way. I was born unable to have kids,’’ said Kyle Casson. ‘‘Being a dad was a high priority in my life and now I have done it.”

Sources: http://news.nationalpost.com/2015/03/08/british-mother-becomes-controversial-surrogate-by-using-donor-egg-fertilized-by-sons-sperm/

Adoption order granted to single father in surrogacy arrangement

Woman acts as surrogate mother for son’s baby

In B v C (Surrogacy: Adoption) [2015] EWFC 17 (Fam), Mrs Justice Theis has granted an adoption order in favour of B, who was a single father of the child, A.  B's sperm and a donor egg had been implanted into C (who was in fact B's mother).  C was married to D (B's father).  By operation of HFEA 2008 s.31, C was the legal mother of A and her husband, D was A's legal father by virtue of HFEA 2008 s.35(1).  Accordingly B was not recognised as a legal parent and sought to establish legal parenthood (and to extinguish the parentage between A and C and D).

Since section 54(2) of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 excludes single commissioning parents from applying for parental orders, B applied for an adoption order. The application was supported by all of the parties, including A's Guardian and the local authority. 

This was an unusual case and the court analysed the relevant provisions of the Adoption and Children Act 2002, including possible criminal liability in respect of a breach of s.92 ACA 2002 (which effectively creates a criminal offence under s.93 ACA 2002 for private adoptions without using an adoption agency).  In this case, a criminal offence had not been committed because of s.92(3) and (4) which provides that an offence is not committed if the prospective adopters are parents, relatives or guardians of the child, or a partner of a parent of the child.  Given that as a matter of law, B was in fact the legal brother of A, the court found that B was a "relative" within the meaning of s.144 ACA 2002.

In an article for Family Law Week by Anne-Marie Hutchinson OBE and Colin Rogerson of Dawson Cornwell, which analyses the issues in this case, the authors remind practitioners to be careful to ensure that they do not advise single commissioning parent clients to embark upon a process of adoption if their clients are at risk of inadvertently committing a criminal offence contrary to the Adoption and Children Act 2002.

Sources: http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed143641

Furore as gay man's mother agrees to bear his baby

A woman has helped her 24-year-old son become a father by carrying his child.

In the first surrogacy of its kind, a donor egg fertilised by her son Kyle was implanted in British woman Anne-Marie Casson, 46.

Kyle, gay and single, had wanted to be a father "for some considerable time".

A surrogacy clinic had turned him away, and then a female relative who had volunteered to be the surrogate developed medical difficulties.

It was at this point that Anne-Marie Casson and her husband Alan decided that she should be the surrogate mother.

A family court judge ruled that it was "entirely lawful" for Kyle to adopt the baby, Miles - his son but also, legally, his brother.

Kyle is the first single man in the UK to have a child through surrogacy, and the first to use his mother as the carrier.

The Cassons' case has ignited huge controversy: the participants' consanguinity raises the spectre of one of the few remaining taboos - incest.

Both Anne-Marie and Kyle Casson have said their friends have been overwhelmingly supportive.

Sources: http://www.timeslive.co.za/thetimes/2015/03/09/furore-as-gay-man-s-mother-agrees-to-bear-his-baby

Pitfalls for Single Parents in Surrogacy

Anne-Marie Hutchinson OBE, Partner, and Colin Rogerson, Solicitor Advocate, both of Dawson Cornwell, consider the options for single parents seeking legal parentage of children born through a surrogacy arrangement.

Introduction
Parental Orders were first introduced by section 30 of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990.  When section 54 of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 came into effect in April 2010, the law remained largely unchanged with the notable widening of the scope of potential applicants under the 2008 Act. 

Section 30(2) of the 1990 Act required the applicants in a parental order application to be "husband and wife."  Section 54(2) of the 2008 Act provides that:

"(2) The applicants must be –

(a) husband and wife;

(b) civil partners of each other, or

(c) two persons who are living as partners in an enduring family type relationship and are not within prohibited degrees of separation of each other."

Section 54(2) of the 2008 Act excludes single commissioning parents from applying for parental orders.  That is in contradistinction to the position in adoption where a single applicant can apply for an adoption order pursuant to section 51 of the Adoption and Children Act 2002. 

Similarly, if a single woman conceives by donor sperm donated through a clinic licensed by the HFEA, the donor is not treated in law as the father of the child (HFEA 2008 s.41(1)) and the child has one legal parent.

Consequently, English law permits:

a single woman to become the sole legal parent via the HFEA 2008;
a single parent to adopt (whether a man or woman); and
a couple to acquire legal parentage through a parental order (if they are married, in a civil partnership or in an enduring family relationship).
In these circumstances it is difficult to understand what justifications or policy considerations exist to prevent a single applicant from applying for a parental order.

Notwithstanding the prohibition on parental order applications by single parents, there is nothing to stop a single commissioning parent from entering into a surrogacy arrangement either in this jurisdiction or overseas. 

It is crucial for all commissioning parents, whether single or otherwise, to take legal advice before they embark upon a surrogacy arrangement. 

Adoption as a means to secure legal parentage
In A and A v P, P and B [2011] EWHC 1738 (Fam) Theis J observed that "the effect of a parental order is the same as an adoption order." (paragraph 30(4)).  More recently in AB v CD (Surrogacy: Time Limit and Consent) [2015] EWFC 12 Theis J resiled somewhat:

"[71] I agree a parental order and the consequences that flow from it are, from a welfare perspective, far more suited to surrogacy situations. They were specifically created to deal with these situations. Put simply, they are a more honest order which reflects the reality of what was intended, the lineage connection that already exists and more accurately reflects the child's identity. An adoption order in these situations leaves open the risk of a fiction regarding identity that may need to be resolved by the child later in life. The effect of an adoption order according to s 67 (1) ACA 2002 of treating the child 'as if' the child is born as a child of the adopter or adopters is not the reality; the child is born with a biological connection to one of the applicants. However, there may be circumstances where a parental order is not an option, for example where the biological parent is single."

In B v C (Surrogacy: Adoption) [2015] EWFC 17 (Fam), Theis J considered an application for an adoption order made by B, who was a single father of the child, A.  B's sperm and a donor egg had been implanted into C (who was in fact B's mother).  C was married to D (B's father).  By operation of HFEA 2008 s.31, C was the legal mother of A and her husband, D was A's legal father by virtue of HFEA 2008 s.35(1).  Accordingly B was not recognised as a legal parent and sought to establish legal parenthood (and to extinguish the parentage between A and C and D).

B's application for an adoption order was supported by all of the parties, including A's Guardian and the local authority.  This was an unusual case and the court analysed the relevant provisions of the Adoption and Children Act 2002, including possible criminal liability in respect of a breach of s.92 ACA 2002 (which effectively creates a criminal offence under s.93 ACA 2002 for private adoptions without using an adoption agency).  In this case, a criminal offence had not been committed because of s.92(3) and (4) which provides that an offence is not committed if the prospective adopters are parents, relatives or guardians of the child, or a partner of a parent of the child.  Given that as a matter of law, B was in fact the legal brother of A, the court found that B was a "relative" within the meaning of s.144 ACA 2002.

B v C [2015] EWFC 17 (Fam) highlights the complexities that arise when adoption is used in the context of a surrogacy arrangement.  But for the commissioning parent's familial relationship with his surrogate, it is likely that B, C and D would have all been guilty of offences under the ACA 2002. 
It should also be noted that B v C [2015] EWFC 17 (Fam) was a domestic altruistic surrogacy arrangement.  There are many children born as a result of commercial surrogacy (where surrogates have been paid sums of money in excess of reasonable expenses) to either surrogates in this jurisdiction or overseas.  Applying for adoption orders in this context could have even more serious implications for the parties involved in the process.

International surrogacy issues
Where a child is born through an international surrogacy arrangement, their place of birth is likely to be in the country of the surrogate mother.  In order to bring the child back to this jurisdiction, the commissioning parents need to obtain travel documents or visas prior to travel.  In the context of a surrogacy arrangement with a single commissioning parent, if they intend to apply to adopt their child, they face criminal liability under ACA 2002 s.83(1)(a) which provides that it is a criminal offence to "bring, or cause another to bring, a child who is habitually resident outside the British Islands into the United Kingdom for the purpose of adoption of by the British resident."  

Commercial surrogacy issues – whether domestic or international
Nearly all international surrogacy arrangements and most domestic surrogacy arrangements will have a commercial element to them, in that the surrogate receives a payment that amounts to a fee for carrying the child for the commissioning parents.  In the context of a parental order application, HFEA 2008 s.54(8) provides that the court can retrospectively authorise the payments made by the applicants and there is a well-established line of authorities whereby the English courts authorise such payments.  Within the context of adoption, ACA 2002 s.95 prohibits payments other than an 'excepted payment' which is made for or in consideration of the adoption of a child.  ACA 2002 s.96 sets out what payments are considered to be 'excepted payments' as payments:

i. made to a registered adoption society in respect of expenses reasonably incurred by the society in connection with the adoption;

ii. legal or medical expenses incurred;

iii. in the context of an international adoption, payments that relate to travel and accommodation reasonably incurred in removing the child from the United Kingdom for the purpose of adoption.

Thus in most commercial surrogacy cases, the question of criminal liability under ACA 2002 s.95 will arise.  

What needs to be done?
It remains to be seen whether it will be argued that the prohibition on single parent applicants is not compatible with the ECHR – particularly if the application is made by a single commissioning mother who is able to use her own eggs but is not able to carry the child.  By virtue of HFEA 2008 s.31 a single commissioning mother will never be recognised as a legal parent because the surrogate would always be recognised as the legal parent.  On the other hand, single commissioning fathers might still be considered a legal parent if there is no second parent by virtue of HFEA 2008 ss.35 or 42.

Using adoption to secure legal parentage is not without its difficulties and practitioners should be careful to ensure that they do not advise single commissioning parent clients to embark upon a process of adoption if their clients are at risk of inadvertently committing a criminal offence contrary to the Adoption and Children Act 2002.

Hopefully Parliament will consider amending the statutory criteria for a parental order to allow single commissioning parents to apply for a parental order.  Until then the position for single commissioning parents, surrogates and most importantly the children born through such arrangements will remain uncertain. 

Sources: http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed143616

Surrogacy for gay couples in Victoria, Australia

With two failed foreign surrogacy attempts behind them, a gay couple from Victoria have found the answer closer to home, writes Julia Medew.

For the past four years, Andrew Brough and Simon Curtis' quest to have a baby has been a costly global mission.

In 2012, the gay couple found an egg donor through an agency in South Africa who ticked all the right boxes. The anonymous woman had a healthy medical history, blue eyes like the two of them and came across as smart and fun in her written correspondence.

In one of the first altruistic surrogacy arrangements brokered by two gay men in Victoria, Andrew and Simon this week won approval for Andrew's sister-in-law, Lani Rowell, to carry a baby for them this year.

Like many gay men before them, the pair then found an Indian surrogate who could carry an embryo created for them using Andrew's sperm and their donor's eggs. They met the surrogate – a woman with a young son who wanted money to put him through school and build a new home – and felt comfortable with the process.

But it did not go well. After spending $65,000, their surrogate miscarried at 21 weeks. They tried again, but just as their third attempt was failing, the Indian Government decided to restrict surrogacy to heterosexual couples.

Heartbroken, the pair looked at other international options. But in the end, the answer was waiting at home.

In one of the first altruistic surrogacy arrangements brokered by two gay men in Victoria, Andrew and Simon this week won approval for Andrew's sister-in-law, Lani Rowell, to carry a baby for them this year.

Under the deal, an egg donor will provide eggs to be fertilised with Andrew's sperm and Lani will have the embryo implanted into her womb.

While more than  50 women have agreed to be surrogates in Victoria since a 2010 law change opened it up to more people, only five gay male couples have struck such a deal.

After Andrew, Simon, Lani and her husband Jason (Andrew's brother) celebrated the final sign off from Victoria's Patient Review Panel this week, they said the process had been difficult at times.

For the last two years, the four of them have had to complete police and child protection order checks and have psychological and legal counselling to work through all the possible scenarios, such as what would happen if Andrew and Simon broke up during the pregnancy or Lani and Jason did not want to hand the baby over.

With the paperwork now complete, they are all excited about starting the IVF process in coming months.

"I feel so blessed. It has brought us all much closer together," said Andrew.

Lani, a mother of two, said she and Jason decided to offer her womb to the couple because they had completed their own family and wanted Andrew and Simon to experience the same joy of parenthood. Lani said she also wanted them to be able to watch the pregnancy grow and be at the birth – something that may not have occurred with an overseas surrogate.

But there has been see-sawing emotions and trepidation throughout the process, too.

"It's funny, one moment I feel really excited about getting pregnant again and then I remember how much it can hurt!" she says, laughing.

Lani also felt it was important to ensure Jason was ready for the emotional highs and lows that have accompanied her previous pregnancies.

"The hormones send you crazy loopy and that will be Jason's brunt, so he has had to be on board more than anyone else… He is very supportive of it, though," she said. 

Together, the four of them have discussed many practical possibilities. For example, while Lani is hoping to give birth in the same public hospital she delivered her two children in, she wants to ensure there are options for her to be separated from the baby so she does not bond with it. She will also not breastfeed the baby, but if she can express some milk, she will provide it. 

"It's hard to know how I will feel," she said. "I know it will be a hugely emotional experience."

But Lani said there was no chance she would try to keep the baby.

"If I really want another baby, I will have my own," she said.

Simon said while Andrew planned to hold Lani's hand during the birth, he is already hoping to catch the baby.

"I think it would be amazing to the be the first person to actually see that new person entering the world," he said.

Sam Everingham, founder of Surrogacy Australia, said the trend towards gay men striking altruistic surrogacy arrangements in Australia was encouraging because both India and Thailand had shut down the option in recent years.

While other countries such as Nepal and Mexico are opening up new commercial surrogacy opportunities, he said it currently cost about $170,000 to employ a surrogate in the US. In Australia, it is illegal to pay anyone for their sperm, eggs or surrogacy, but reasonable expenses can be covered.

"This story is great. We want to see more of it in Australia," he said. "The stumbling block is usually finding a surrogate."

Surrogacy Australia's next annual conference will be held in Sydney on May 16-17. 

ALTRUISTIC SURROGACY IN VICTORIA
Are you eligible to apply for a surrogate?

Anyone can apply but a doctor must believe you are unlikely to become pregnant, be able to carry a pregnancy or give birth.

Are you eligible to be a surrogate?

Must be 25 or older.

Must have previously given birth to a live child.

Your egg must not be used in the conception of the child.

Will you both ...

Have counselling and legal advice?

Ensure you are prepared for consequences if arrangement does not proceed as intended?

Undergo a criminal record check?

Agree to a child protection order check?

If yes, the Patient Review Panel will consider your request.

NB: In exceptional circumstances, the panel may approve a surrogacy arrangement even when not satisfied of all the matters above. 

Sources: http://www.smh.com.au/national/health/surrogacy-for-gay-couples-in-victoria-australia-20150306-13xcd5.html

Woman gives birth to her own son's IVF baby: Now he wins right to adopt child who is his brother

• Mother helped her son become a father by carrying his child as a surrogate
• Clinic arranged the woman's pregnancy using donor egg and son's sperm
• Offered to have baby after her son's plans for IVF child with another female relative collapsed
• The procedure, revealed in the High Court, is believed to be a world first
• Judge rules the son can adopt the baby boy and become his legal father
• But critics have called for urgent reforms to prevent abuses of fertility law

A mother has helped her own son become a father - by carrying his child as a surrogate.

In a procedure believed to be a world first, a fertility clinic arranged the woman’s pregnancy using a donor egg and her son’s sperm.

She offered to have the baby – with her husband’s consent – after plans by their son to have an IVF child with another female relative collapsed.

The extraordinary arrangement emerged when a High Court judge ruled that the son can now adopt the baby boy and become his legal father – even though in the eyes of the law he is also the infant’s brother.

However, the move was met with howls of protest by critics, who described the procedure as ‘dubious’ and called for urgent reforms to prevent abuses of fertility law.

Mrs Justice Theis, who did not identify the family, the clinic or the local authority in the area where they live, said: ‘The arrangement the parties entered into is not one, as far as I am aware, that either this court or the clinic have previously encountered and although highly unusual is entirely lawful under the relevant statutory provisions.’

The father, who is in his mid-20s and lives alone, has wanted to be a parent ‘for some considerable time’ but waited until he had a settled job and home so he could provide ‘the care a child would need’.

The judge said he discussed the issue openly with family and close friends and arranged for another relative to act as surrogate mother, but the woman dropped out because of a medical condition.

At that stage, Mrs Justice Theis said, the man’s mother discussed with her husband the possibility of stepping in to help.

The family attended a series of counselling sessions and discussions with the clinic, which is licensed by regulator the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA).

The plans, described by the centre’s medical director as unique, were then given the go-head after ‘careful consideration’.

The baby, now seven months old, was born at full term and now lives with his father. However the judge warned others not to embark on surrogacy deals without ‘comprehensive legal advice’ because the process is a ‘legal minefield’.

Mrs Justice Theis said that under the 2008 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act, which governs surrogacy arrangements, the woman who carried the child is the legal mother. Her husband is the legal father because he consented to the pregnancy.

Rules stipulate that a surrogate mother must hand over a child to two parents – usually a couple ‘in an enduring family relationship’.

Under the law, it would be a crime to hand over the baby to the biological father alone.

But the judge argued that the adoption would not break laws because the baby and its father are legally related already as brothers. Social workers backed the adoption, saying it would ‘strengthen the bond’ the father and child already share’.

A report described how the baby ‘clearly has formulated a secure attachment to the father’, adding: ‘The father understands that the child will need to know about how he was conceived and feels that he will utilise the security of the family structure to support his son in understanding that he is a very much wanted child.’

Another report said the mother and her husband regard the child as their grandson, adding that the family want the child to know about the circumstances surrounding his birth.

Mrs Justice Theis said the closeness of the family was a ‘critical feature’ of the case.

‘The strength of these familial relationships, and the consequent support they provide now and in the future, will ensure the child’s lifelong needs are met,’ she added.

But last night critics said the law should never permit such an arrangement.

Author and broadcaster on family issues Jill Kirby said: ‘The ethics in this case are very dubious indeed. If the HFEA considers this to be a legal procedure, there is an urgent need to look at the law again.’

Patricia Morgan, a leading researcher on family policy, said: ‘This child will have so much confusion in its background.

‘The evidence suggests that the further we move away from two biological parents, the less good that is for the child.’

Robert Flello, Labour MP for Stoke-on-Trent South, said: ‘This case throws up many concerns and worries. My greatest concern in all of this is the potential emotional damage to the child in years to come, as he tries to work out family relationships that most of us can take for granted.’

The job of the HFEA, established in 1991, is to licence and monitor clinics and embryo research, and provide the public with impartial information about both. Its chairman since last year is former accountant Sally Cheshire.

Sources: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2978232/Woman-gives-birth-son-s-IVF-baby-wins-right-adopt-child-brother.html

Happy Holi to all from SurrogacyIndia

May God gift you all the colors of life, colors of joy, happiness, friendship, love and all other colors you want to paint in your life. Happy Holi.

SI is not working tomorrow 5th of March 2015, as Holi celebration is to be followed as per India culture. Happy Holi to all from SurrogacyIndia

Woman acted as surrogate mother for son's IVF baby, court hears

Man in his 20s told he may adopt his biological son after court is told how he embarked on ‘process of becoming a father’ with assistance from his own mother

A woman acted as a surrogate mother for a baby whose biological father is her adult son, a family court judge has been told.

The man, who is in his mid-20s and lives alone, had taken advice from specialist lawyers before embarking on the “process of becoming a father”, Mrs Justice Theis heard. He had looked after the little boy – now seven months old – since birth. Theis has ruled that he can adopt.

Detail of the case emerged in a written ruling by Theis following a family court hearing in London. The judge said she had never encountered such a surrogacy arrangement before.

But she said it was “entirely lawful” and had been entered into after “careful consideration”. She said her paramount consideration had been the little boy’s “lifelong welfare”. And she said allowing the man to adopt would provide “legal security” and meet the little boy’s long-term welfare needs.

Theis said the man’s mother’s husband had been supportive. She said another family member had initially offered to be the surrogate but had to withdraw for medical reasons.

The man’s mother – whose age was not revealed in the ruling – had then agreed to step in. Theis did not identify anyone involved.

“(The baby) has lived with ... his biological father since birth. All the reports describe (the man’s) care of (the baby) as being to a high standard,” said Theis in the ruling.

“(The baby) was born following a surrogacy arrangement whereby the gestational surrogate was (the man’s) mother. (Her husband) fully supported this. (She) agreed to undertake this role when another maternal relation, who had offered to be a surrogate mother for (the baby) had to withdraw prior to any treatment, due to her own medical position.

“This, admittedly, unusual arrangement was entered into by the parties after careful consideration, following each having individual counselling and with all the treatment being undertaken by a fertility clinic licensed by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA).”

The judge added: “The arrangement the parties entered into is not one, as far as I am aware, that either this court or the clinic has previously encountered and although highly unusual, is entirely lawful under the relevant statutory provisions.”

She said the man was in his mid-20s, lived alone and had worked since leaving school.

“The papers show that for some considerable time he has wanted to be a father,” added Theis.

“He waited until his circumstances were settled in terms of a job and home to enable him to provide the care a child would need. He sought advice from specialist fertility lawyers and licensed fertility clinics, to enable him to gain advice and understanding before embarking on any process of becoming a father. This is an issue that he has discussed openly with his family and close friends.”

Theis added that after the original relative had not been able to proceed with the plan owing to her medical condition, the man’s mother discussed with her husband the possibility of her becoming the gestational surrogate.

“They agreed they would suggest this to (the man). He accepted that offer and (the man, his mother and her husband) were seen at the fertility clinic that was being asked to undertake the proposed treatment.

“They discussed the position with the medical director and each had individual and joint counselling sessions with the independent counsellor to discuss the long term implications of the proposed arrangement.

“Prior to the counselling taking place, the clinic had discussed what the medical director referred to as this ‘unique case’.
“Subject to nothing of concern arising in the required counselling, the clinic agreed it would proceed with the treatment.

“The counselling was completed and the treatment proceeded. An embryo was created using a donor egg and (the man’s) sperm, following transfer of the embryo to (the man’s mother) she carried (the baby) and he was born at full term.”

The judge said family court litigation began after the man issued an adoption application. She said a social worker had met everyone involved and recommended allowing the man to adopt. “The court’s paramount consideration is (the little boy’s) lifelong welfare,” said Theis.

“What is apparent from the reports is that the parties thought carefully about this arrangement, pausing, reflecting and seeking advice at each stage.”

Sources: http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/mar/04/woman-acted-as-surrogate-mother-for-sons-ivf-baby-court-hears

Surrogate mother cries foul after giving away her baby

BANGKOK: — A woman who gave birth to a baby in January and then gave it away under a surrogacy programme has called on the authorities to help her get the infant back.

The 34-year-old woman, who cannot be named, now wants the baby back because she suspects he is her biological son.

“How do I know if it was my egg or someone else’s egg? I can’t be sure. So, I want the baby back,” she said.

An agent recruited the woman to serve as a surrogate mother for an American man who was in his 40s, she said. The surrogacy contract involved a six-digit baht payment plus a monthly allowance of Bt14,000 during the pregnancy. After she gave birth to the baby, the man never contacted her again.

“We have already alerted the US embassy here to help prevent the father from taking the baby out of Thailand,” said Verutai Maneenuchnate, an executive director at the Women Lawyers’ Association of Thailand.

Verutai yesterday brought the woman to National Legislative Assembly (NLA) member Wallop Tangkananurak to ask for legal help.

Wallop chairs the NLA committee on society and the affairs of children, youth, women, the elderly, people with disabilities and the underprivileged.

The paid surrogacy contract the woman signed constituted human trafficking and should be void, Verutai said.

The commercial surrogacy service was offered through a clinic run by Dr Pisit Tantiwattanakul, the same doctor who allegedly allowed a Japanese man to hire many Thai women to bear his children.

The case of the Japanese man caused a major scandal last year and the media speculated as to why he would want so many children.

Wallop said his NLA committee had set up a subcommittee to look into surrogacy issues.

“It will handle many cases including the one involving the Japanese man,” he said.

Representatives from various relevant organisations, such as the Medical Council, sit on this subcommittee, he said.

While the NLA passed the Act to Protect Babies Born Through Assisted Reproductive Technologies on February 19, it has not yet taken effect. It will come into force 90 days after the NLA gives the green light. This law will not be applied retroactively.

Sources: http://news.thaivisa.com/thailand/surrogate-mother-cries-foul-after-giving-away-her-baby/34301/

Surrogate mothers in India unaware of risks

Renting out their wombs may ease financial problems for poor women in India, but new research suggests surrogate mothers there are unaware of the risks and often left out of key medical decisions about their pregnancy.

“Of the 14 surrogate mothers I interviewed, not a single one could explain the risks from having multiple embryos placed in their uterus, or having a fetal reduction or a Cesarean section,” said Dr. Malene Tanderup from Aarhus University in Denmark.

“Pregnancy is the most dangerous time in a woman’s life,” she told Reuters Health. “They have to know what they are agreeing to.”

Most countries ban commercial surrogacy, but India remains a popular destination for “rent-a-womb” tourism, which brings in an estimated $500 million to $2.3 billion annually.

The women in India who become surrogate mothers are mostly poor and uneducated. The $3,000 to $7,000 they typically earn can mean a vastly improved living situation, education for their children or the chance to start a small business.

Yet large payments to fertility clinics and lack of regulation raise worries that surrogate mothers are being exploited.

New findings reported in Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica fuel those concerns.

“This article shows the ground reality in a very stark manner,” said Dr. Amar Jesani, editor of the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics, who was not involved in the study.

He said lack of truly informed consent to medical procedures is a widespread problem in India. “I’m not surprised at all by the findings,” Jesani told Reuters Health.

In Tanderup’s study, none of the surrogate mothers knew how many embryos had been transferred, or the complications of multifetal pregnancy or fetal reduction.

That’s a problem, Tanderup says, because the 18 clinics she visited typically transferred several embryos at a time - in one case as many as seven.

With each additional fetus, risks to mothers and babies climb. Babies from multiple pregnancies are more likely to be premature or have cerebral palsy or learning disabilities, and mothers have higher risks of high blood pressure, diabetes or postpartum bleeding.

When Tanderup asked doctors if they told surrogate mothers how many embryos they transfer, one answered: “No, we never ask them and they are not even informed how many are going to be transferred. They are illiterate, uneducated girls.”

Two-thirds of clinics decided how many embryos transfer to do without consulting the commissioning parents or the surrogates. Four said they asked the commissioning parents, and only one included the surrogate mothers.

Clinics typically reduce the number of fetuses according to commissioning parents’ wishes. A lethal solution is injected into unwanted fetuses around week 10 of pregnancy.

Fetal reduction is generally considered safe, but it carries a small risk of infection and loss of the remaining fetuses. Because surrogate mothers are paid monthly during pregnancy, they get less money if they miscarry.

Only three clinics involved surrogates in decisions about reduction.

In one case, when a woman carrying twins wanted a reduction, the agent and doctor refused. Instead, they offered an additional 50,000 rupees ($809) plus a C-section, which she accepted. As one doctor explained, if the commissioning parents get twins, “it is two in one shot, they don’t have to spend that money again.”

But whether the extra payment “makes up for the extra risks is unclear,” Tanderup said.

A twin pregnancy in India almost invariably leads to a C-section, she explained. Afterward, mothers shouldn’t lift heavy things for a while and might not be able to return to daily duties right away. And should they get pregnant again, they’ll typically need another C-section.

The contract says nothing about who pays for that procedure or for infections or other complications after delivery, Tanderup added.

An earlier study from India found that surrogacy contracts rarely addressed the health and wellbeing of the surrogate mother.

Jesani, from the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics, said the findings cast both commissioning parents and doctors in an unflattering light.

“The doctors seem to be more loyal to the commissioning parents than to the surrogates,” said Jesani, also at the Centre for Studies in Ethics and Rights in Mumbai.

He added, “A large number of commissioning parents are Indian, I’m not saying this is only foreigners.”

Legislation to regulate the Indian surrogacy market - the Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill - has been pending for years, with activists arguing it’s too soft and industry taking the opposite view.

In the meantime, business may pick up. Last month Thailand outlawed surrogacy services for foreigners following several scandals, including an Australian couple that allegedly abandoned a baby with Down syndrome with his Thai mother but took his healthy twin home with them.

Sources: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/02/us-surrogate-mothers-india-idUSKBN0LY1J720150302

Coudray: No adoptions for same-sex couples

Trinidad and Tobago is not “that advanced” for the Government to contemplate the issue of adoption for same-sex couples, Local Government Minister Marlene Coudray stated in the Senate on Tuesday.

Responding to statements by Independent Senator Joy Abdul-Mohan that Government will have to consider what policy it should adopt with respect to adoption by same-sex partners, Coudray said: “That issue of same-sex couples adopting, we are not that advanced, but you never know in the future what would happen. And there are also issues dealing with surrogate parents that the so-called developed countries are dealing with and grappling with and no doubt these will engage us in the future.”

The minister conceded that the Adoption of Children’s Bill had “gaps” and did not address some of the challenges pertaining to adoption.

“We are saying that this is the first stage of our proposal and there are many more that we need to look at, as we progress. But we have made a very good start in coming this far in this short time. And if you look at the issues concerning adoption globally, there are many other issues concerning adoption as was said (by Abdul-Mohan).

“There are many issues that we need to deal with and it is possible to envisage that further amendment of the Act may be necessary in the future. It is a living, dynamic thing. And as we go along and the Children’s Authority sits, and as the cases and issues come up, I am sure that new legislation would be proposed to address some of the gaps and shortfalls in this legislation,” said Coudray.

Earlier in the debate, Independent Senator Dr Dhanayshar Mahabir said Government needs to clarify its position with respect to surrogacy, as the way the legislation was currently drafted makes it illegal for that method to be used.

He explained that a surrogate mother makes an agreement with two people to bear a child, sometimes using her own egg, and then hand over the child to them after birth.
Mahabir said this is a private arrangement but seems to go against the provisions in the bill.

“The Government of our Republic, in representing this bill to use, should articulate a position on surrogacy and in articulating this position it should then indicate whether we are in total disagreement with surrogate mother arrangements or we are in agreement,” said Mahabir.

Independent Senator Anthony Vieira raised concerns about children who are cared for by homes across the country.

He said these children should not be deprived of a family because of challenges in dealing with the biological parents.

Sources: http://www.trinidadexpress.com/news/Coudray-No-adoptions-for-same-sex-couples-294592911.html

Plea in SC to ban commercial surrogacy

New Delhi, Feb. 25: The Supreme Court today asked a host of central ministries to respond to a plea that said the country had become a "baby factory" and sought judicial intervention to ban commercial surrogacy as it amounted to exploiting Indian womanhood.

The court also asked the commerce ministry to explain under what provisions had it decided to permit import of human embryo, another point the petitioner raised in her PIL.

There is no law in India now that governs surrogacy, which involves carrying a pregnancy for the intended parents.

When the arrangement is for a fee, it becomes a "commercial surrogacy agreement", which the petitioner says should be banned.

"Yes, even some countries like South Korea have banned it. We need to look into the larger issues involved in the petition," Justices Ranjan Gogoi and N.V. Ramana said.

The bench asked the ministries of home, law, health, commerce and external affairs to respond within four weeks. It also sought replies from the Medical Council of India and the Indian Council of Medical Research.

In her petition, advocate Jayashree Wad said the country had virtually become a "baby factory" as a large number of foreign couples have been coming to India in search of surrogate mothers.

Senior counsel Shekhar Naphade and advocate Tamali Wad, who appeared for the petitioner, said this has become a business involving doctors, hospitals and other institutions.

"The Indian ladies in question usually come from poor or lower middle class families. These ladies, who act as surrogate mothers, render their services for a fee. Thus, in this whole process of surrogate motherhood, a commercial element is introduced.... This is clearly exploitation of Indian womanhood for commercial gain," Tamali told the court.

The advocate contended that this amounted to a "violation" of Article 21 (right to life and liberty), possibly meaning that every pregnancy had an element of risk.

"Neither Parliament nor any state legislature has prohibited this practice," the lawyer added, requesting the court's urgent intervention and an "authoritative pronouncement" that commercial surrogacy was "contrary" to public policy, "unethical" and, therefore, "ought not to be permitted in this country".

Naphade said to "protect the rights of womanhood", the Centre was "under an obligation" to prohibit the entry of foreign couples or individuals who visit the country for hiring surrogate mothers.

The senior counsel also requested the court to "set aside" a December 2013 notification by the commerce ministry that purportedly allowed import of human embryo under the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992, and the Foreign Trade Policy, 2009-2014.

Naphade said foreign trade and customs laws dealt with import of goods and services but human embryos were neither goods nor could be classified as services. So the notification went against the provisions of the trade act and policy. "There is no enactment on the statute book which permits the import of human embryo," the counsel added.

The petition also dealt with what it called the growth of the embryo in the womb. It said foreign couples "import" - directly or through IVF centres - embryo, "which is a human being in miniature form" in the womb of the Indian mother. "This amounts to trafficking in human beings."

It spoke of the possibility of "physical or mental trauma" of surrogacy on those who carry the pregnancy. "In all probability, the Indian society at large would look down upon such women. After all, giving birth to a child even in a nor.

Sources: http://www.telegraphindia.com/1150226/jsp/nation/story_5600.jsp#.VPVDu3yUfOw

'At least 57' babies born abroad for Irish couples through surrogates

AT least 57 children have been born abroad through a surrogate mother and brought back to Ireland since 2008, new figures reveal.

The statistics are based on the number of emergency travel certificates which the new parents must apply for in order to take the baby home, depending on the country where the surrogacy took place.

It is understood that a number of these were twins and triplets and were part of 43 Irish families.

Most Irish people who use commercial surrogacy arrangements abroad go to India or the United States.

In order to bring the child home from India, they have to get an emergency travel certificate for the baby and the father has to prove by DNA evidence that he is the child's father. The consent must also be obtained from the surrogate mother.

The father has to provide undertakings to the Irish authorities that he will inform the Health Service Executive (HSE) two days after getting back to Ireland that he has brought the child back to the State and make an application for a declaration of parentage and guardianship within two weeks.

Surrogacy in India costs around €30,000 but it is as high as €120,000 in the United States.

Children born through surrogacy in the United States get a passport so authorities here are less likely to know the birth circumstances of the child.

The figures come in the wake of proposals announced by Health Minister Leo Varadkar to start drawing up legislation governing fertility treatments including surrogacy.

It will be allowed here on an altruistic basis but any commercial agreement involving payment will be banned.

Due to the lack of legislation relating to surrogacy currently, individuals availing of surrogacy within Ireland are under no obligation to report this information.

Fertility

Therefore, there are no exact figures available for domestic surrogacy in Ireland.

However, there is anecdotal evidence that such surrogacy arrangements are entered into here already - for example, the recent Supreme Court surrogacy case in 2014.

In that case, a woman acted as surrogate for her sister, giving birth to twins.

When the legislation is finally in place, well into next year or beyond, fertility clinics here will have to provide detailed information about the common procedures they perform, such as IVF, in order to monitor the safety, quality and outcomes.

The research to date however suggests that the treatments currently offered by fertility facilities here are very safe and complications are well within acceptable European norms.

The European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) collates statistics in relation to fertility procedures carried out in European Union countries. Data for Ireland shows that in 2010 there were 1,856 cycles of IVF and 1,320 cycles of ICSI which involves injecting sperm into the egg and is useful where a man has a low sperm count.

In 2009 there were 1,987 IVF cycles and 1,328 ICSI cycles.

Sources: http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/health/at-least-57-babies-born-abroad-for-irish-couples-through-surrogates-31026340.html

Thailand ideas to conclude "rent-a-womb" tourism

Thailand's interim parliament has passed a law that bans foreigners from seeking surrogacy services to end a "rent-a-womb" industry that made the Southeast Asian country a top destination for fertility tourism.

Asfouri | AFP | Getty ImagesThe entrance of New Everyday living IVF clinic reveals its closed doors in Bangkok on August fifteen, 2014.
Thailand's interim parliament has handed a regulation that bans foreigners from trying to find surrogacy solutions to close a "rent-a-womb" industry that manufactured the Southeast Asian region a prime location for fertility tourism.

Thailand was rocked by various surrogacy scandals very last 12 months, which include allegations that an Australian pair had deserted their Down Syndrome infant with his Thai delivery mother using only his wholesome twin sister back to Australia with them.

An additional case concerned a Japanese man who fathered at minimum at minimum 16 babies employing Thai surrogates in what area Thai media identified as the "toddler manufacturing unit".

Thailand gave preliminary acceptance in August for a draft law to make business surrogacy a crime. The draft passed its to start with reading in November and became law on Thursday.

"This regulation aims to prevent Thai women's wombs from starting to be the world's womb. This legislation bans overseas couples from coming to Thailand to seek out commercial surrogacy solutions," Wanlop Tankananurak, a member of Thailand's Nationwide Legislative Assembly, explained to Reuters.

The legislation bans international partners from trying to find surrogacy providers and stipulates that surrogate mothers ought to be Thai and more than 25.

Browse A lot moreChinese vacationers to carry smiles back again to Thailand

"The vital section is if the pair searching for surrogacy products and services is Thai or the couple is mixed-race, they can uncover a Thai girl to be their surrogate furnishing she is over 25," he claimed, introducing that violation of the law carries a "extreme jail sentence".

Critics say generating commercial surrogacy unlawful could drive the business underground, creating it tougher for sufferers to entry good quality medical professionals and health-related care.

Thailand's junta, recognized as the Nationwide Council for Peace and Buy, disbanded the upper house Senate adhering to a Could coup and positioned all law-earning authority in the palms of an interim parliament hand-picked by the army rulers.

Sources: http://www.thebeaconreview.com/business/thailand-ideas-to-conclude-rentawomb-tourism-h638.html