Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Vol. 8 No. 1 (2020)
Space and Culture, India

Special Articles

Right to be a Surrogate: Biological, Constitutional and Economic Perspectives

https://doi.org/10.20896/saci.v8i1.699

Published 2020-06-29

  • Meghna Borah
    • ,
  • Arup Kumar Hazarika
    • ,
  • Unmilan Kalita

Meghna Borah


Arup Kumar Hazarika
Cotton University

Unmilan Kalita
Department of Economics, Cotton University, Guwahati, India

Abstract

For the survival of all forms of life, procreation is essential. However, natural procreation is not always scientifically possible. As such, the practice of surrogacy and the use of Assisted Reproductive Techniques have become more widely recognised and accepted in societies all over the world. However, various complex and controversial issues are bounded in such practices. The Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill, 2019 introduced by Government of India makes an attempt to eradicate some of those issues associated with surrogacy.

Nevertheless, the legislation seems to be in derogation to the Constitution of India and universal human rights. This study is designed to substantiate in detail the right to be a surrogate in light of the constitutional mandate along with an evaluation of the eligibility criteria to be a surrogate and its consequences with regard to the existing legal framework. Besides, the economic perspective of exploitation of surrogates via banning of commercial surrogacy has been briefly discussed. The discussion under this study is expected to put forward an essential perspective to the right to be a surrogate in relation to a woman’s right to life and personal liberty. Further, prohibiting commercial surrogacy may push practicing surrogates towards other economically unrewarding, poorly regulated and potentially hazardous forms of employment or even make them subject to human trafficking. Therefore, recognition of the right to be a surrogate vis-à-vis the Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill, 2019, would help in avoiding blatant miscarriage of universal justice while upholding the supremacy of the Constitution of India.

Keywords

Surrogacy, Legislative Framework, Trafficking, Assistive Reproductive Technology, Citizens’ Rights, Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill 2019, India

pdf

References

  1. Anderson, E. S. (2000). Why commercial surrogate motherhood unethically commodifies women and children: reply to McLachlan and Swales. Health care analysis, 8(1), 19-26. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009477906883. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009477906883
  2. B. K. Parthasarthy v. State of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 2000 AP 156.
  3. Bakshi, P. M. (2016). The Constitution of India. New Delhi: Universal Law Publishing.
  4. Bailey, A. (2011). Reconceiving surrogacy: Toward a reproductive justice account of Indian surrogacy. Hypatia, 26(4), 715-741. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2011.01168.x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2011.01168.x
  5. Bhattacharyya, R. (2016a). Draft surrogacy (regulation) bill 2016: Rhetoric or surrogate-centric? Space and Culture, India, 4(2), 9-21. https://doi.org/10.20896/saci.v4i2.219. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20896/saci.v4i2.219
  6. Bhattacharyya, R. (2016b). Discounted life: The price of global surrogacy in India, Journal Gender, Place and Culture: A Journal of Feminist Geography, 1813-1814. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0966369X.2016.1211585. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0966369X.2016.1211585
  7. Buergenthal, T. (1975). The revised OAS Charter and the protection of human rights. American Journal of International Law, 69(4), 828-839. https://doi.org/10.2307/2200626. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2200626
  8. Dhillon, A. (2012). Mothers for hire. The Sydney Morning Herald, 7. Retrieved 29 May 2020 from, http://www.thelizlibrary.org/surrogacy/120907-mothers-for-hire.pdf.
  9. Dixon-Mueller, R. (1993). Population policy & women's rights: Transforming reproductive choice. ABC-CLIO.
  10. Galbraith, M., McLachlan, H. V., & Swales, J. K. (2005). Commercial agencies and surrogate motherhood: a transaction cost approach. Health Care Analysis, 13(1), 11-31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-005-2567-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-005-2567-3
  11. Ganapathy, N. (2019, 19 August). India's move to ban commercial surrogacy sends industry into panic. The Straits Times, Singapore. Retrieved on 19 March 2020 from, https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/south-asia/indias-move-to-ban-commercial-surrogacy-sends-industry-into-panic.
  12. Grima, F. M. (2018). Surrogacy: women’s empowerment or exploitation? (Master's thesis) University of Malta). Retrieved on 20 March 2020 from, https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/39970.
  13. Gupta, A., & Prasad, S. (2019). ‘Outsourced pregnancy’: Surrogate narratives from Hyderabad. Contributions to Indian Sociology, 53(2), 299-327. https://doi.org/10.1177/0069966719836883 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0069966719836883
  14. Indian Council of Medical Research. (2005). National Guidelines for Accreditation, Supervision & Regulation of ART Clinics in India. Government of India. Retrieved on 10 June 2020 from, http://icmr.nic.in/art/art_clinics.
  15. India, L. C. (2009). Need for legislation to regulate assisted reproductive technology clinics as well as rights and obligation of parties to a surrogacy. Report No. 228, Government of India, New Delhi. Retrieved on 20 March 2020 from, http://claradoc.gpa.free.fr/doc/180.pdf.
  16. Jaipuriar, V. (2014). Womb rental ends in death. The Telegraph, India. Retrieved on 30 May 2020 from, https://www.telegraphindia.com/states/jharkhand/womb-rental-ends-in-death/cid/164231.
  17. Johnson, C., & Rintoul, J. (2019). From nursing virgins to Brelfies: the project of maternal femininity. Journal of Gender Studies, 28(8), 918-936. https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2019.1607267. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2019.1607267
  18. Kaur, R. (2015). Surrogacy and its socio legal implications in India (Master’s Dissertation, Guru Nanak Dev University, India). Retrieved on 19 March 2020 from, http://hdl.handle.net/10603/160789.
  19. Km. Hema Mishra vs State of UP & Ors, AIR 2014 SC 146.
  20. Kotiswaran, P. (2018). Law’s Paradoxes: Governing Surrogacy in India. In Cross-Cultural Comparisons on Surrogacy and Egg Donation (pp. 127-151). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78670-4_7
  21. Kumar, P., Inder, D., & Sharma, N. (2013). Surrogacy and women's right to health in India: Issues and perspective. Indian Journal of Public Health, 57(2), 65. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-557x.114984 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-557X.114984
  22. Kusum, S. (2013). Commercial Surrogacy and Feminist Perspectives. Karnataka Law Journal, 1(13). Retrieved on 7 June 2020 from, https://writingsonsurrogacy.wordpress.com/2016/10/18/commercial-surrogacy-feminist-perspectives/.
  23. Kusum, S. (2014). Legal Glitches Facing Surrogacy Agreement in India. Indian Journal of Law & Public Policy, 1, 26. https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/ijlpp1&div=19&id=&page=.
  24. Kusum, S. (2018, 24 April). What If the Surrogate Mother Dies ? The Economic Times, India. Retrieved on 25 April 2020 from, https://health.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/industry/what-if-the-surrogate-mother-dies-sonali-kusum/63897209.
  25. Kumar, T. A. (2004). In vitro fertilization in India. Current Science, 86(2), 254-256. Retrieved on 30 May 2020 from, https://www.jstor.org/stable/24107860.
  26. Mahardani, N. P. T., Putra, B. A., Syahdan, P., Ismail, S., & Burhanuddin, A. (2020). Process and problems of the international adoption in surrogacy cross-border practices in India. Enfermería Clínica, 30, 115-118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enfcli.2019.07.058 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enfcli.2019.07.058
  27. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597.
  28. O'reilly, A. (2010). Encyclopedia of motherhood. Sage Publications, CA. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412979276
  29. Pande, A. (2010). Commercial surrogacy in India: Manufacturing a perfect mother-worker. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 35(4), 969-992. https://doi.org/10.1086/651043. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/651043
  30. Pande, A. (2014). Wombs in labor: Transnational commercial surrogacy in India. Columbia University Press. https://doi.org/10.7312/pand16990. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7312/pand16990
  31. Pande, A. (2015). Blood, sweat and dummy tummies: Kin labour and transnational surrogacy in India. Anthropologica, 57(1), 53-62. www.jstor.org/stable/24470912.
  32. Parry, B. (2018). Surrogate labour: exceptional for whom?. Economy and Society, 47(2), 214-233. https://doi.org/10.1080/03085147.2018.1487180. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03085147.2018.1487180
  33. Patel, N. H., Jadeja, Y. D., Bhadarka, H. K., Patel, M. N., Patel, N. H., & Sodagar, N. R. (2018). Insight into different aspects of surrogacy practices. Journal of Human Reproductive Sciences, 11(3), 212. https://doi.org/10.4103/jhrs.jhrs_138_17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/jhrs.JHRS_138_17
  34. Qadeer, I. (2010). Benefits and threats of international trade in health: A case of surrogacy in India. Global Social Policy, 10(3), 303-305. https://doi.org/10.1177/14680181100100030206. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/14680181100100030206
  35. Rajan, S. (2014). Resolving Statelessness Arising out of Surrogacy in India: A Legal Analysis. – International Human & Refugee Law, 14, 177. Retrieved 5 June 2020 from, https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/isilyrbk13&div=10&id=&page=.
  36. Ramskold, L. A. H., & Posner, M. P. (2013). Commercial surrogacy: how provisions of monetary remuneration and powers of international law can prevent exploitation of gestational surrogates. Journal of medical ethics, 39(6), 397-402.https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2012-100527. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2012-100527
  37. Reddy, J. (2020). Indian surrogacy: Ending cheap labour. Santa Clara Journal of International Law, 18(1), 92. Retrieved on 19 March 2020 from, https://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1236&context=scujil.
  38. Rwabihama, J. P., Belmin, J., Hagege, M., Audureau, E., Benzengli, H., Ambime, G., ... &
  39. Sagar, S. (2017). Indian law and policy on surrogacy: A socio-legal study with special reference to Bareilly and Moradabad. Unpublished Doctoral thesis, Dr. BR Ambedkar University, India.
  40. Saini, A. (2020). Surrogacy laws in India: Legality and validity as per law. Our Heritage, 68(30), 1830-1835. Retrieved on 08 February 2020 from https://archives.ourheritagejournal.com/index.php/oh/article/view/3575.
  41. Samudrala, S. (2020). Altruistic surrogacy contracts: legal analysis of The Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill, 2019 and its legal implications. Christ University Law Journal, 9(1), 73-97. Retrieved on 19 March 2020 from, http://111.93.136.232/index.php/culj/article/view/2208.
  42. Sehgal, B. P. S. (1995). Human rights in India: problems and perspectives. New Delhi: Deep and Deep Publications.
  43. Select Committee Report Summary for The Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill, 2019. (2020). PRS Legislative Research, Government of India. Retrieved on 28 May 2020 from, https://www.prsindia.org/billtrack/surrogacy-regulation-bill-2019.
  44. Sharma, R. (2007). An International, Moral & Legal Perspective: The Call for Legalization of Surrogacy in India. Moral & Legal Perspective: The Call for Legalization of Surrogacy in India (July 2, 2007).
  45. Sivakami, N., Kanchana, P. N., & Barclay, F. P. (2019). Social Constructs of Surrogacy: The Indian Perspective. Health, Safety and Well-Being of Workers in the Informal Sector in India, 187-196, Singapore: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-8421-9_15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-8421-9_15
  46. Spar, D. (2005). For love and money: the political economy of commercial surrogacy. Review of International Political Economy, 12(2), 287-309.https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290500105615. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290500105615
  47. The Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Bill, 2008 (pending). Retrieved on 10 June 2020 from, https://www.prsindia.org/uploads/media/vikas_doc/docs/1241500084~~DraftARTBill.pdf.
  48. The Assisted Reproductive Technologies (Regulation) Bill, 2010 (pending). Retrieved on 10 June 2020 from, https://main.icmr.nic.in/sites/default/files/guidelines/ART%20REGULATION%20Draft%20Bill1.pdf.
  49. The Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Bill, 2013 (pending). Retrieved on 10 June 2020 from, http://ncw.nic.in/ncw-cells/legal-cell/new-bills-laws-proposed/new-bills-law-proposed#:~:text=The%20Indian%20Council%20of%20Medical,a%20Member%20in%20this%20Committee.
  50. The Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill, 2016 (passed by Lok Sabha, 19/12/2018). Retrieved on 9 June 2020 from, https://www.prsindia.org/billtrack/surrogacy-regulation-bill-2016.
  51. The Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill, 2018 (pending). Retrieved on 9 June 2020 from, http://164.100.47.4/BillsTexts/LSBillTexts/PassedLoksabha/257-C%20_2016_Eng..pdf.
  52. The Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill, 2019 (passed by Lok Sabha, 05/08/2019). Retrieved on 15 March 2020 from, http://www.cnlu.ac.in/2016/Notices/MOOTS/SILC%20Format.pdf.
  53. Thomas, M. (2009, 02 November). Outsourcing surrogacy. The Hindu, India. https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/open-page/Outsourcing-surrogacy/article16889820.ece.
  54. Timms, O. (2018). Ending commercial surrogacy in India: significance of the Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill, 2016. Indian Journal of Medical Ethics, 3, 99. https://doi.org/10.20529/ijme.2018.019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20529/IJME.2018.019
  55. Torres, G., Shapiro, A., & Mackey, T. K. (2019). A review of surrogate motherhood regulation in south American countries: pointing to a need for an international legal framework. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 19(1), 46. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-019-2182-1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-019-2182-1
  56. UN General Assembly. (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. United Nations, 302(2). https://doi.org/10.4337/9781845428297.00024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781845428297.00024
  57. UN General Assembly. (1966). International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. United Nations, 993, 3. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781845428297.00026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781845428297.00026
  58. UN General Assembly. (1975). Declaration on the Use of Scientific and Technological Progress in the Interests of Peace and for the Benefit of Mankind. United Nations, Paris. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/189603?ln=en.
  59. UN General Assembly. (1998). Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, Geneva. https://en.unesco.org/themes/ethics-science-and-technology/bioethics-and-human-rights.
  60. Van den Akker, O. B. (2017). Surrogate motherhood families. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60453-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60453-4
  61. Verma, A. (2019). Social implications of surrogacy in India. Research Journal of Social Sciences, 10(7). Retrieved on 19 March 2020 from, https://www.ijitee.org/wp-content/uploads/papers/v8i12/L33261081219.pdf.
  62. Vincent, C., & Aftandilian, A. D. (2013). Liberation or exploitation: commercial surrogacy and the Indian surrogate. Suffolk Transnat'l L. Rev., 36, 671. https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/sujtnlr36&div=32&id=&page=.
  63. Watson, C. (2016). Womb Rentals and Baby-Selling: does surrogacy undermine the human dignity and rights of the surrogate mother and child?. The New Bioethics, 22(3), 212-228. https://doi.org/10.1080/20502877.2016.1238582. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/20502877.2016.1238582
  64. Wilkinson, S. (2016). Exploitation in international paid surrogacy arrangements. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 33(2), 125-145. https://doi.org/10.1111/japp.12138 . DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/japp.12138
  65. Winerip, M. (2007, 23 December). My sister, my surrogate. The New York Times, United States of America. Retrieved on 10 February 2020 from, https://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/23/nyregion/nyregionspecial2/23Rparent.html.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.