A controversial global social issue that can be related to the prisoner’s dilemma argument is child surrogacy. The parties involved are the couple who want a child by a surrogate mother as they are unable to have children due to medical issues and the surrogate mother. The surrogacy agency also plays a major role and therefore can be considered as a different party. Each side has a different purpose, for the surrogate mother it’s her way of income to survive in the economy, for the agency it is a business and for the parents it’s a way they can get a child which they are unable to do due to age or other circumstances which are medical. There is a choice whether the individual wishes to be a surrogate mother for a method of income; they cannot …show more content…
Surrogate mothers are being taken benefit of by intending parents. For example, leaving a child behind due to gender or diseases detected such as Down syndrome. The surrogate mother is left to bring up a child by herself and is not given extra support such as money or she is left with the option of getting an abortion. There have been some exceptions such as the Baby Gammy case where the surrogate mother was told to have an abortion, but she decided to go through with the pregnancy and asked the intending parents to give her an extra amount of money to bring up the baby by herself. Even though this has happened to a surrogate mother, it is rare. Not every surrogate mother goes through this injustice. There are many couples that have gone through surrogacy and introduce their child to their surrogate mother and culture. The point I am trying to make is that this injustice is not common but happens in rare occasions, and due to the act of just a few people, it should not be taken away from the many people who wish to start their own family (with a genetic link) through surrogacy as there are unable to do so due to biological
There are four types of surrogacy. First is the traditional, or formally known as genetic surrogacy. Genetic surrogacy is when the carrier donates both her eggs and her womb. With this route, there are many legal issues that the parents could face. Under the law, the carrier is the mother of the child. It is also unethical and illegal, according to the 13th amendment, to hand over the custody of a child for money. Also, against the 13th amendment, there is a forced separation of mother and child in this situation. One of the biggest risk that parents take with this type of surrogate mother, is that the mother is allowed to decide to keep the baby and they can do nothing about it. The surrogate mother, by law, is allowed to keep this baby because it is her egg which means that it is biologically her child.
I do detect a strong parallel between paying for non-replenishable organs and poor individuals harming their bodies for the benefit of the rich. First of all, I do not believe it is acceptable to accept a payment or fee or the duty of carrying a child as a surrogate for the gestational mother. In most cases when a fee is accepted for this service, the child is by definition labeled as a product of a business transaction. Due to the fact that a fee is paid to the surrogate mother for bearing the child as well as lawfully accepting provisions such as refrainment from smoking, drinking alcoholic beverages, revoking her right to abort unless assessed by a physician as necessary for the surrogate’s health, or even taking certain medications, thus crafts the act into one requiring payment for the purchase of a baby. “Such provisions indicate that the fee is a payment for a healthy child and not for the rental of a uterus” (Baillie, Garrett, Garrett, McGeehan, Health Care Ethics: Principles and Problems, 2009, p.232). The resulting fact is that payment is rendered for a satisfactory product: a healthy baby who is raised by the surrogate in its fetal state under many stipulations and conditions. This gives way to “the fact that the presence of payment may tempt financially distressed women to agree to surrogate contracts against their best interests” (Baillie, Garrett, Garrett, McGeehan, Health Care Ethics: Principles and Problems, 2009, p.234). This directly correlates with another
Australian law reforms have been adequately effective in dealing with surrogacy and birthing technologies. The NSW state reforms have effectively supported the changing values of society by aiming to achieve justice and avoid conflicts surrounding surrogacy, while the commonwealth is obsolete on effective laws to prevent surrogacy issues. As the demand for surrogacy and birthing technologies increases, issues surrounding surrogacy are more prevalent in society. Additionally, there is no Commonwealth law, meaning each state and territory has developed individual laws of surrogacy and birthing technologies, allowing for issues and challenges surrounding the protection and the rights of all parties involved.
Why the law is contradictory and ineffective when it comes to overseas surrogacy- Altruistic surrogacy is diversely regulated by the states and territories, raising the issue of the interaction of those laws in international cases. Commercial surrogacy is prohibited in Australia, but is permitted in other countries. An increasing number of Australians exploit this difference by entering into commercial surrogacy agreements overseas, raising the question of the effect of such agreements in Australia. Suggesting that the well-meaning regulation of altruistic surrogacy and criminalisation of commercial surrogacy within Australia is likely to be ineffective in cross-border situations. Accordingly, suggests to reform the Australian law and endorses
I read an article that was published on The Hasting Center Journal, called “The Case Against Surrogate Parenting”, by Herbert Krimmel, Krimmel takes a stand against surrogate motherhood arrangements because of the many ethical issues it causes, he argues surrogate motherhood, is a financial profit, there can be conflicts during the process, and is designed to separate in the mind of the surrogate mother. First, Krimmel argues that the reason a woman often or always undertakes the pregnancy is because of the money motive. He states, “The cause of this dissociation is some other benefit she will receive, most often money.' In other words, her desire to create a child is born of some motive other than the desire to be a parent. This separation
Commercial surrogacy is the process in which a woman is paid a fee to carry and deliver a baby to term. Once the baby is delivered, the woman relinquishes all parental rights to the commissioning couple who exclusively raise the child as their own. Altruistic surrogacy, by contrast, is an arrangement where the surrogate receives reimbursement but only for the expenses that she may have incurred during the pregnancy. In this essay I will argue that commercial surrogacy should not be market-inalienable. I will start by outlining Elizabeth Anderson’s argument in “Is Women’s Labor a Commodity?” in which she offers a number of criticisms to commercial surrogacy. I will then outline objections to the argument and highlight how her argument is highly speculative and does not provide an adequate basis for the prohibition of commercial surrogacy.
Gammy was born to a Thai surrogate who was paid by Australian intended parents. Gammy was born with down syndrome and a hole in his heart requiring extensive medical treatment. The intended parents chose to take Gammy’s healthy twin sister back to Australia, leaving Gammy with his surrogate. This case caused international concern, raising awareness of the lack of regulation of international surrogacy arrangements and highlighting the ethical considerations involved in the practice of
Baby Business by Insight on SBS had a discussion about surrogacy in relation to a couple that had a baby though surrogacy. In the show it was said that most surrogate mothers have genetically babies, which the mother gives her egg and the father gives his sperm and the doctor inseminates it in the surrogate mother. Most of the everyday people have to the term “renting a womb” towards surrogacy whereas the Women Health Resources
Purdy defends surrogate mothering from a consequentialist point of view. Her case is founded on two premises: firstly, that surrogacy is favourable (that is, it brings about pleasure and reduces pain), and secondly, that the practice is only non-traditional and not morally reprehensible. She thus concludes that "appealing to the sacrosanctity of traditional marriage or of blood ties to prohibit otherwise acceptable practices that would satisfy people 's desires hardly makes sense", and thus, surrogacy should be permissible (Purdy, 1999).
When one or more persons contract with a woman to gestate a child than relinquish that child after birth to the person or couple is known as surrogacy. It is a course of action that goes outside of natural reproduction. For some, it is the only method of having children, extending family. Surrogacy has been stirring up many controversies over the years. Ethics, morals, laws, religious views, etc. have played a major role in the issues that follow the topic of surrogacy. Laws and regulations pertaining to surrogacy vary from state to state. Some states have no enforceable laws
Surrogate motherhood is considered the most controversial form of medically assisted conception. Surrogacy is defined as an arrangement by which a woman gives birth to a baby on behalf of a woman who is incapable of conceiving babies herself or is infertile. The issue of surrogacy has been running for almost three decades. Elizabeth Cane was the first woman in the United States to legally become a surrogate mother in 1980 (Chittom and Wagner). Surrogate births are illegal in many countries, including some states in the United States. For example, it is illegal in Michigan, Washington, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, and New York, whereas it legal in California, Oregon, Texas, and Arkansas (Chittom and Wagner). According to the Organization of Parents Through Surrogacy (OPTS), about 22,000 babies have been born from surrogate mothers in the United States since surrogacy became legal in the 1970s (Chittom and Wagner).
The Marxist criminalization of commercial surrogacy originates from the class divisions produced when the reproductive labors of poor women are exploited by wealthy couples. Because the parties within a surrogacy contract often are not autonomous equals and hold distinct relationships to the means of production, female surrogates unintentionally reinforce class divisions through their participation in womb commodification. However, there are also cases in which surrogates are not drawn from lower economic strata, so the possibility of their labor being “forced” by economic circumstances is attenuated. These include instances of altruistic surrogacy, in which the surrogate is motivated by a desire apart from monetary need, such as a wish to bestow a gift upon the
Laws are legislated and enforced for the mere purpose of protecting all individuals in a society by stating what is and what is not acceptable behavior. Though it is impossible for these legislative decisions to please every single individual in a society, these governs are passed in morality of the thousands of elected parties in charge. Commercial surrogacy is a current complex issue that evokes strong moralistic response. Commercial surrogacy takes away the childbearing element in the reproductive period for individuals looking to have or extend a family. It has opened the doors for many who cannot bear children of their own though this behavior has also raised many concerns about the appropriate scope of the market. This “method for acquiring children” is more commonly objected because the children and women’s reproductive ability are being treated as a commodity. Summed up through Elizabeth S. Anderson’s article, “Is Women’s Labor a Commodity?” children are buyer durables and women are baby factories (Anderson 82). Anderson communicates commercial surrogacy children as commodities stating how this “market” that these children are born into expresses attitude that endorses market norms as opposed to ‘norms of parental love”(Anderson 76). Anderson focuses her paper towards the manipulation, alienation, and exploitation of women that commodifies women’s reproductive capacities. Through Anderson’s argument and her perceptive relations of this market to alienation,
In today’s society, surrogacy is becoming a more and more popular and common issue. For many couples who cannot or unwilling to carry babies by themselves, surrogacy is the first choice to have their own babies and build a family. The legality of surrogacy is different for every country. There are countries that consider the birth mother as the legal mother while there are those that don't. Besides, a lower price of surrogacy in developing countries drives them to find surrogate mother overseas. Thus, international
Some states require a contract among all parties to the surrogacy birthing arrangement, and there are often requirements that the contract address certain issues. However, good practice requires that a host of additional issues be addressed in a contract in order to forge a true "meeting of the minds" on what is undoubtedly one of the most personal and complicated of concerted human actions… (Johnson 5.)