Surrogacy In Australia Essay

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.

Non-legal responses include surrogacy Australia, which advocates for surrogacy as an effective means for infertile parents. By supporting surrogacy it helps to make it a positive way of becoming parents, which creates debate about it which eventually helps to create a law reform which will benefit people.

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).

‘Children all around the country are going into court and claiming that they should have been aborted. Parents are agreeing with their children, and they too are asking courts to award them damages because they did not abort’.

A new precedent needs to be set. The medical industry and political landscape have both changed drastically since 1973, making the decades-old court decision weak and irrelevant. Players in all three branches of government, as well as civilian advocate organizations on both sides, such as National Right to Life and Planned Parenthood, have fought tooth and nail over how to interpret the Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey decisions, whether they are valid, and whether or not they should be

This is true; however, Linda Sparkman and others like her deserve justice. This justice begins by admitting that Ora McFarlane’s actions and the court’s decision was beyond unethical but purely eugenic. A relationship between a parent and a child is one involving genuine care, acceptance, interdependence between the two and a duty of the parent to adhere to these virtues. Sterilizing a teenager because they “fraternize with men” is not justified by care ethics nor the law as shown earlier due to the lack of statutory authorization. The mother’s wishes do, however, make sense from a pro-eugenic

Issue: Should substantial burden of a legal abortion be taken into court consideration if a provision is meant to be promoting the state’s general health?

Good afternoon, Mr Prime Minster, and federal and state members of parliament. I’m Alex Barry-Ramoi, we are all here today to review and debate our current laws affecting the Australian family. As you’ve stated Mr Prime Minster, we are in a time of great social change and family life has become vastly different to that of our grandparents. The values of the new generation are changing and our laws need to be updated to be properly adequate for these changes. One of those laws that I personally feel requires immediate change is our current laws surrounding surrogacy as it has always been and always will be a common desire to have a family. The current laws and penalties are Inconsistent throughout all states, they discriminate especially against same-sex couples, they don’t make clear on what is legally acceptable and our current law system just moves our surrogacy issues overseas.

Scholars who oppose surrogacy are of the opinion that infertile couples should consider alternative options to have children, such as adoption. The argument is that there are already-existing children and children about to be born in need of parental care and love. However, legal problems can be associated with this option, especially if the biological parents want the child back. Another similar alternative is fostering. The downside is that the children in need of foster care often have a difficult time adjusting. Parents need to be confident and patient. Also, there is a chance that such parents may not raise the children throughout their entire childhood years; nevertheless, it is possible to maintain contact. The opposing argument is that surrogacy is better, since the child and intended parents are genetically

Simply, surrogacy involves an agreement between a commissioning couple and a woman, known as the surrogate, who agrees to bear a child for the commissioning couple, and once the baby is born, will give the baby to the commissioning couple. Often this involves the use of sperm and/or ova from the commissioning couple which are conceived to the surrogate using birth technologies. The act of commercial surrogacy is illegal in Australia, however in certain states and the Northern Territory it is still legal to travel overseas to seek out such services commercially. The Australian couple the article focuses on is a prime example of this as they travelled to New Delhi in India to seek out such a surrogacy service.

The legal issue of Surrogacy is often referred to as a contentious topic which holds a variety of viewpoints. The ongoing topic is constantly on the public agenda as it raises many social, emotional, medical, financial, legal issues and challenges laws which surround the subject. This report will explain the law as it operates in Australia, analyse stakeholder perspectives, evaluate the law and provide recommendations to the legal system.

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,

Utilizing a surrogate mother to carry our potential child is the choice for us. Initially, the idea of exchanging a baby for money is a process that appears emotionless and materialistic, but when one looks at the reasoning behind the decision, it proves to be just the opposite. In chapter 6 of Moral Choices: An Introduction to Ethics it refers to Altruistic Surrogacy as, an arrangement without a fee, occurs when a close friend or family member functions as a surrogate solely out of a generous desire to impart “the gift of life”. (Rae, p. 252) I believe we have many women in our life that would be willing to help us out. These helpful women would understand that I may have a life-changing illness or simply unable to bear children.

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