The Queensland investigation into the decriminalisation of altruistic surrogacy

Tabling of report, "Investigation into the decriminalisation and regulation of altruistic surrogacy in Queensland' - issues - recommendations - need for decriminalisation of altruistic surrogacy in Queensland.

Surrogacy : is it harder to relinquish genes?

Surrogacy has produced some positive outcomes creating an opportunity for otherwise childless couples to live their dream of parenthood. However it has also been problematic, particularly where the surrogate mother fails to relinquish a child born as a result of the surrogacy arrangement. This article examines whether a surrogate mother, who is genetically related to the child she delivers, is less likely to relinquish the child than one who has no genetic ties. An examination of empirical evidence provides support for this argument. Legislation and case law in three jurisdictions, Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom, is examined to determine which, if any, of these jurisdictions take into account the existence, or otherwise, of a genetic link between the surrogate mother and the child she bears. The article concludes that surrogacy legislation should, subject to exceptional circumstances, encourage surrogacy arrangements where the child and the surrogate are not genetically related.

Surrogacy and IVF

While in the past surrogacy was illegal in Queensland, since June 2010 the Surrogacy Act 2010 (Qld) (“the Act”) has made altruistic surrogacy arrangements lawful in Queensland. In addition, it provides a mechanism for transfer of legal parentage from the surrogate to the person(s) wishing to have a child (the intended parent(s)). Commercial surrogacy – where a payment, reward or other material benefit of advantage (other than the reimbursement of the “birth mother’s surrogacy costs” (s11 of the Act) is made for entering into a surrogacy arrangement – remains unlawful. The paramount guiding principle underpinning the Act is that of the wellbeing and best interests of a child born as a result of surrogacy. The Surrogacy Act 2010 (Qld) allows a single person or a couple (heterosexual or same sex couples) to enter into an agreement with a woman, and her partner (if she has one), to become pregnant with the intention that the child will be relinquished to the intended parent(s). The Act also provides a mechanism for the intended parent(s) to be legally recognised as the parent(s) of the child. In order for the intended parent(s) to be legally recognised (via a parentage order, discussed below) it must be shown that the surrogacy arrangement was entered into when all the parties were over 25 years of age and the intended parent(s) are male or, in a heterosexual or lesbian couple the female(s) are not likely to conceive or give birth to a healthy child due to medical reasons. The arrangement must be entered into before the surrogate becomes pregnant and all parties must have obtained independent legal advice and counselling about the proposed arrangement, and evidence of this is required at the time a parentage order is applied for. For the purposes of the Act it does not matter how the surrogate conceives the child or if the child is genetically related to the parties. During the period of the pregnancy, the surrogate has the right to manage her pregnancy in the way she wishes. Although she cannot profit from acting as a surrogate, section 11 states that she is entitled to surrogacy costs. These include, for example, reasonable medical costs related to pregnancy and the birth of the child; counselling and legal costs associated with the surrogacy arrangement; actual lost earnings because of leave taken during pregnancy or following birth and any reasonable travel expenses incurred. The surrogacy arrangement itself is not legally enforceable; however, obligations to pay a surrogate’s surrogacy costs are enforceable unless she chooses not to relinquish the child to the intending parents. While the Act does not specifically deal with the situation where the surrogate decides she is unprepared to relinquish the child to the intended parents, there have been examples where parties have entered into these kinds of arrangements, and the arrangements have become difficult. For example, the Family Court case of Re Evelyn (1998) FLC 92–807 involved a child born to a surrogate mother who decided not to surrender her. The child was the genetic child of the surrogate mother and the husband of the couple who had contracted with the surrogate mother. Both sets of parents brought proceedings in the court, seeking that the child live with them. In hearing the application, the court applied the paramount principle of the ‘best interests of the child’. The court made clear that there is no presumption in favour of the birth mother, although in this case the court found that the child may be better placed with the surrogate mother’s family.

The Commercial Surrogacy Dilemma

In November 2009 the England and Wales High Court (Family Division) granted a parental order pursuant to s30 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 in respect of twins who came to be in the custody and control of the applicants (Mr and Mrs A) through a surrogacy arrangement. The particularly unusual and interesting aspect of this case is that, on the evidence, Mr and Mrs A had paid expenses to the surrogate above and beyond those allowed by the legislation, thus creating a commercial surrogacy arrangement. Commercial surrogacy arrangements involve the payment of money to the surrogate mother in excess of those expenses which have been reasonably incurred pursuant to the surrogacy arrangement. This case is relevant to Queensland law because commercial surrogacy arrangements are also prohibited in Queensland and, as in the United Kingdom, the court cannot make a parentage order unless it is satisfied the surrogacy arrangement is not a commercial surrogacy arrangement.

Surrogacy - A Path of Obstacles

Surrogacy has become an effective and accepted form of reproductive technology. It enables couples, regardless of gender or sexuality, to achieve the dream of becoming a parent in circumstances where other forms of reproductive technology and adoption are either not possible or have failed. To its credit, the Queensland parliament has recently brought this state up to date by enacting surrogacy laws that are in line with the majority of statutes implemented throughout the country. The Surrogacy Act 2010 (Qld) allows for the court to make a parentage order in certain circumstances where parties have entered into a surrogacy arrangement. A parentage order effectively transfers parental rights from the birth mother (and her spouse or de facto if there is one) to the intended parents. The requirements which must be satisfied to obtain a parenting order are comprehensive and onerous, making the path to parenthood through a surrogacy arrangement by no means easy. At the heart of the surrogacy issue lies a question, the answer to which has shifted and continues to shift as reproductive technologies continue to increase in success, method and popularity - what is a parent? A recent decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, Hudson v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, brought to attention the meaning of the word ‘parent’ as it appears in s 16(2) Australian Citizenship Act 2007 (Cth) (‘the Act’). Section 16(2) deals with citizenship by descent and provides that a person born outside Australia may make an application to the Minister to become an Australian citizen if a parent of the person was an Australian citizen at the time of the birth.

Surrogacy laws in Queensland: one step forward and two steps back?

This short article summarises some of the proposed reforms to surrogacy laws in Queensland, suggested by the Liberal National Party in 2012. The paper outlines some of the main objections that could be voiced in response to the proposed changes to the law.

Back to the future : prohibiting surrogacy for singles, same-sex and shorter-term heterosexual couples in Queensland

This article considers the regulatory position concerning altruistic surrogacy in Queensland, focusing on the intended changes to the current legal framework announced by the government in June 2012. The previous government had made significant progress by reforming surrogacy laws in 2010. However, that progress is at risk of being reversed. The proposed changes to the law would make it a criminal offence to enter into an altruistic surrogacy arrangement for certain individuals or couples. If enacted, the offence would only apply in altruistic surrogacy cases where the intended parent or parents are either single, in a same-sex relationship, or are in a heterosexual relationship of less than two years. Moreover, if enacted, the offence would apply extra-territorially. The authors argue that these changes represent a retrograde step for the law and urge the government to reconsider. This is based on the fact that they are out of step with current social attitudes, are contrary to the spirit of anti-discrimination laws, and that they are unjustified in terms of child welfare concerns.

Surrogacy : competing interests or a tangled web?

Overseas commercial surrogacy is a legally challenging but commonly utilised form of assisted reproductive technology. Not only does it raise complex and competing policy issues, but it tests the relevant Family Law legislation which underpins parenting orders. Decisions handed down by the judiciary are inconsistent. Legislation is inadequate. But still the surge in surrogacy continues as surrogacy destinations such as India and Thailand continue to increase in popularity. Part one of this article addresses the competing interests of the illegality of overseas commercial surrogacy arrangements with the welfare of the child born as a result of such arrangements, and the inconsistent approaches taken by the judiciary. Part two concerns the interpretation of Family Law legislation by the courts in an attempt to provide intended couples and their children with certainty and finality, again resulting in inconsistent judicial decisions. Overseas commercial surrogacy is legally problematic, and intended parents need to be aware of its limitations.

Cross-taxon surrogacy of biodiversity in the Indian Garhwal Himalaya

Biodiversity surveys were conducted in 13, 10x50 m(2) plots located between 1400 to 3100 in abode mean sea level in a range of habitats in temperate mixed Oak and Coniferous forests through sub-alpine to the alpine grasslands in Chamoli district of Uttaranchal state in the Indian Garhwal Himalaya. Cross-taxon congruence in biodiversity (alpha-diversity and beta-diversity) across macrolichens, mosses, liverworts, woody plants (shrubs and trees) and ants was investigated, so as to examine the extent to which these group, of organisms can function as Surrogates for each other. Although woody plants provided a major substrate for macrolichens and mosses, there was no species-specific association between them. Woody plant species richness was highly positively correlated with mosses (r(2) = 0.63, P < 0.001) but the relationship, as not particularly very strong with lichens and liverworts. While there was a significant correlation in the species turnover (β-diversity) of macrolichens with mosses (r(2) = 0.21 P < 0.005). the relationship was relatively poor with the woody plants. On the other hand. negative correlations emerged in the species richness of ants with those of macrolichens, mosses and woody plants (r(2) = -0.44 P < 0.05). but most of the complementarity (turnover) relationships among them were positive, Since diversity between taxonomic hierarchies within the group was consistently significantly positively correlated in all these taxa, the higher taxonomic categories Such as genus and family may be employed as surrogates for rapid assessment and monitoring of species diversity, Although no single group other than macrolichens has emerged as a good indicator of changes in species richness in all other groups, some concordant relationships between them conform to the hypothesis that species assemblages of certain taxonomic groups could still be used as surrogates for efficient monitoring of species diversity in other groups whose distribution may further predict the importance of conserving overall biodiversity in landscapes such as the Garhwal Himalaya. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Surrogacy in Portugal

Surrogacy is the arrangement made by at least three people, in order for a surrogate or gestational mother to carry a pregnancy for the two intended parents, with the objective of the former party relinquishing all rights to the child, once the child is born. As it has only been in recent years that that same reproductive method has begun to be commonly accepted due to certain modern scientific developments that thus diminished ethical and moral negative stances, there is still an unsettling legal void (both at a national and international level) in regards to such subsidiary form of reproduction. As such, some countries have not only left their citizens with no choice but to travel abroad in order to enter a surrogacy arrangement (leading to private international law issues on establishing parenthood and nationality of the born child) or to resort to surrogacy within black market conditions. Unfortunately, one of those countries is Portugal as it has been considered, both by its political parties and experts in the area, and by its citizens as not dealing adequately with such theme and thus being poorly equipped to deal with surrogacy, at both a legal and social level. The present paper attempts to analyse Portugal’s current legal perspective by looking at the present efforts being made to contradict the current situation, and thus outline altruistic gestational surrogacy’s tangible future within such nation. In order to also become aware of possible improvements specifically regarding to the full protection of human rights and human dignity as a whole, the United Kingdom’s legal standpoint in relation to surrogacy was also studied. Via direct comparison of both social and legal perspectives, a new approach to altruistic surrogacy is thus proposed with view to suggest a harmonious solution for countries that have at least recognized that the present issue deserves to be duly noticed and that altruistic gestational surrogacy may exist in order to grant protection of human dignity and not to place it in check.

A.R.T., surrogacy and legal parentage : a comparative legislative review

This is one of three Occasional Papers published by the Victorian Law Reform Commission as part of the Commission's work on assisted reproduction and adoption. A central issue which arises in the context of assisted reproduction is how to recognise and protect the best interests of children who are conceived through assisted reproduction. The three Occasional Papers deal with different aspects of this question. This Paper examines how laws in the other Australian states, and in the United States, United Kingdom and Canada regulate access to assisted reproduction, control the use of surrogacy and deal with issues relating to parentage of children conceived through assisted reproduction. Generally, this legislation gives priority to protecting the best interests of children, but the way in which this is done varies considerably.