Linda Burney and Jenny Millbank

Yesterday the ABC Radio program 'Life Matters' presented 'Surrogacy: the case for and against'. The segment ran for about 20 minutes with the NSW minister for community service Linda Burney giving her case against commercial surrogacy and Professor Jenny Millbank of UTS (Law) giving the case for commercial surrogacy.

 So it was not as straight forward and "for" and "against" surrogacy but more of a set of arguments for and against commercial surrogacy . To summarise some of the main points;

According to Linda Burney (who was involved with the recent extending of the ban on commercial surrogacy in NSW to overseas):

1. The legislation that makes clear the NSW ban on commercial surrogacy is more about the tightening up of regulations and rights in relation to the legal status of altruistic surrogacy
2. The reasoning behind the recent legislative ban on commercial surrogacy in NSW both in Australia and abroad is mainly about the rights of the child (to have access to their gestational and genetic parentage).
3. The emotional and physiological experience of pregnancy and birth should not be underestimated.
4. There is evidence of the exploitation of both the child and the surrogate mother.
5. Is very concerned about the commodification of children and the perception of women as vessels.
6. Concerned about a lack of regulations in the case that a child is born disabled or if something happens to (harm the health of) the surrogate mother during the pregnancy or birth.

Jenny Millbank's main points are:

1. That surrogacy "takes a very special kind of woman" and that the emotional experience of surrogacy is the same whether the surrogate mother receives compensation for her time or not.
2. The main area requiring attention in terms of law and regulation is that of informed consent and the right of the surrogate mother to makes decisions throughout the pregnancy and after the birth of the child.
3. That the involvement of money regarding the latter statement makes this scenario more difficult (but not impossible to regulate).
4. The response of couples who are unable to have children without outside help in cases where the law restricts outside help are more likely to travel overseas in order to have a child of their own.
5. Adoption in Australia is both rare and difficult with a number of exclusions including the exclusion of same sex couples, couples past a specific age, either of a couple being definable as having a disability. And fostering takes a "special kind of person" because the fostering parents must be prepared to allow the child to return to their genetic parents. 

I think it is interesting that in Linda Burney's case against commercial surrogacy she does not give any reasons specific to commercial surrogacy - her points could apply to any form of surrogacy and perhaps also adoption. It is unclear how her argument relates to commercial surrogacy specifically.

Jenny Millbank's argument for commercial surrogacy seems much closer to the point, wherein she is specifically comparing some differences and similarities between commercial and altruistic surrogacy.

What is missing from this argument is the lived experience of commercial surrogacy, we are missing the voices of people who have experienced surrogacy first hand: the voices of intended parents who have become parents through commercial surrogacy arrangements, or altruistic surrogacy arrangements and the voices of surrogate mothers commercial or altruistic – and of course the voices of any children born of a surrogate mother.

Celerbrities and surrogacy

January 2011 seems to be saturated with stories of surrogacy. Recently we heard that Elton John and partner David Furnish have welcomed a little baby boy into their family with the help of a surrogate mother, and just yesterday that Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban have welcomed a baby girl to their family with the help of a surrogate mother. Hello magazine has provided a gallery of images of celebrities who have had help from surrogate mothers; Dennis Quaid, Neil Patrick Harris, Ricky Martin, Michael Jackson, Kelsey Grammar, Sarah Jessica Parker and Matthew Broderick. It seems that surrogacy is totally 'in'!

I noticed a distinct difference in tone in a couple of the recent articles and wanted to put it out there for fellow bloggers and other interested visitors' comments:

The SMH reported today on the recent birth of Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban's second child via a surrogate mother. The article then goes on to discuss the recent changes to the law in NSW wherein the ban on commercial surrogacy has been clarified to extend to commercial surrogacy arrangements outside Australia. You can read the article here. Over all I felt there was a fairy balanced tone to this article where it was questioned as to how effective these laws may be.

In contrast an article in The Australian on the 5th of January this year began with the happy news of the birth of Elton John and David Furnish's first child, via a surrogate mother. The article then moves into "ethical" aspects of surrogacy as highlighted by Margaret Sommerville. Although the article claims to be listing the key ethical aspects of surrogacy, in fact the same point is made over and over again which is basically the right of the child born via surrogacy to know the genetic parents. You can read the article here.

Both articles use celebrities and surrogacy as a jumping point to discuss or highlight issues related to surrogacy and more broadly on creating families. Where the SMH article seems simply to present the current legal status of surrogacy in NSW and question the practicality of these changes to the law,
The Australian article seems to be taking a specific stance on surrogacy, and not just surrogacy but more to the point, same sex parenthood. For example:

"On the question of a child's right to both a mother and father we are told by some that society has moved on, progressed. We now live in an era of genderless parenting where function has prevailed over form. However, as Somerville notes, research is showing men and women parent differently. There is emerging evidence that certain genes in young mammals are activated by parental behaviour, for example in epigenetics, which studies the interaction of genes and environment. As Somerville says, science may well show that complementarity in parenting (having both a mother and father) does matter for children's wellbeing in ways we have not understood."


It would be great to hear from some families who have become parents with the help of a surrogate. What do you think about these articles and the issues they raise?