Commercial surrogacysome troubling family lawWord文档下载推荐.docx
- 文档编号:16199254
- 上传时间:2022-11-21
- 格式:DOCX
- 页数:19
- 大小:39.83KB
Commercial surrogacysome troubling family lawWord文档下载推荐.docx
《Commercial surrogacysome troubling family lawWord文档下载推荐.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《Commercial surrogacysome troubling family lawWord文档下载推荐.docx(19页珍藏版)》请在冰豆网上搜索。
MaryKeyesandRichardChisholm
Theachingdesireforachildfeltbythoseunabletoconceivebynormalmeans,povertyandtheprofitmotivecanbeaterriblecombinationresultinginexploitation(especiallyofthepoor),abuseofhumanrightsandthecommodificationofchildren.JohnPascoe
Introduction
Commercialsurrogacyhasflourishedinrecenttimes,apparentlyincreasingby1000%internationallybetween2008and2010.Countrieshaverespondedtotheproblemindifferentways.
InAustralia,surrogacyhasrecentlybeenmadethesubjectofspecificlegislationinallstatesandterritoriesapartfromtheNorthernTerritory.Thelegislationdrawsafundamentaldistinctionbetweenaltruisticsurrogacyandcommercialsurrogacy(thesubjectofthisarticle).Surrogacyiscommercialifthecommissioningparentshaveagreedtopaythebirthmothermorethanreimbursementofherexpensesincurredinthepregnancyandbirth.Underthesurrogacylegislation,itisusuallyacrimetoenterintoacommercialsurrogacyagreement,advertiseforsurrogacyarrangements,andprocuresurrogacyarrangements.Inthreejurisdictions,theoffencesareexpresslystatedtoapplywithextraterritorialeffect,inorder,ithasbeensaid,topreventevasionofthelegislationandexploitationofwomenindevelopingcountries.Bycontrast,unpaid(‘altruistic’)surrogacyispermitted,subjecttoextensiveanddiverseregulationswhicharedesignedtoprotectthepartiestosurrogacyarrangementsandthechildrenbornfromthem.
Thus,makingcommercialsurrogacyarrangementsinvolvesseriouscriminaloffencesunderthelawsofmostAustralianjurisdictions.YettheFamilyCourthasseenanincreaseinapplicationsforparentingandotherordersundertheFamilyLawAct1975arisingfromcommercialsurrogacyarrangements,mainlyinvolvingchildrenfromThailandandIndia,wheresucharrangementsare(asyet)permittedbylawandwherepoorwomencanbefoundwho,forapayment,willdonateeggs,carryandgivebirthtoachild,andthenrelinquishthechildforevertotheAustraliancommissioningcouple,whoreturntoAustraliawiththechildren.Inmostofthecases,oneofthemalecommissioningparentsisthegeneticfatherofthechild.Inthepublishedcases,theapplicantcommissioningparentsthencometotheAustralianfamilycourtsseekingordersthattheyhaveparentalresponsibility,and,lesscommonly,thattheapplicantwhohasdonatedthespermfromwhichthechildwasbornshouldbefoundordeclaredtobethechild’sfather.AtthetimeofwritingthereweresixteenreportedcasesinwhichthecommissioningparentsappliedtotheFamilyCourtforparentingorders.
Notsurprisingly,thiscontroversialtopichasbeenthetopicofanumberofrecentpublicationsinAustraliaaswellaselsewhere.Inthisarticlewehopetocontributetotherapidly-evolvingdiscussionabouthowAustraliamightachieveacoherentpositiononcommercialsurrogacythatreflectsinformedanddeliberatedecisionsaboutsomedifficultpolicyissues.
Thepresentdiscussionislimitedtofamilylaw,andespeciallytheissuesthathavesurfacedinthereportedcases.First,itaddressestheapparentlysimplequestion:
Whoaretheparentsofsurrogacychildren?
Wereviewthelegislationandcaselawandtrytoidentifywhatpointsareclearandwhatissuesstillneedtoberesolved.
Second,wereviewdiscretionarydecisions,suchasmakingparentingordersanddeclarationsofparentage.Shouldthecourtbemakingsuchordersifdoingsogiveseffecttocriminalarrangements?
Andwhenitappearsthatthecommissioningparentsorothershaveactedcriminallyinparticipatinginthesurrogacyagreement,shouldthecourtreferthepaperstotheappropriateauthoritytoconsiderprosecution?
Wereviewtheanswersthatfirstinstancejudgeshavegiventothesequestions,andsuggestthatasatisfactoryoutcomewillrequiretheFullCourttoaddresscertainfundamentalquestionsofprinciple.WeconcludethatachievingaprincipledandconsistentAustralianapproachtocommercialsurrogacywillrequireacooperativeeffortbetweentheCommonwealthandthestatesandterritories.
Part1:
Itissurprisinglydifficulttoidentifythelegal‘parents’ofchildrenbornasaresultofinternationalsurrogacyarrangements.Thissectionexaminestherathertechnicallawinvolved.ItdealsespeciallywiththeAct’spresumptionsofparentage,sections60Hand60HB,andtheadmissibilityofDNAevidencebasedonsamplesillegallytakenfromchildren.Italsoraisesaquestionyettobethesubjectofjudicialdecision,namelywhetherparentageistobedeterminedbyAustralianlaw,orthelawofthecountryinwhichthechildwasborn.Weconsiderlaterwhetherthecourtshouldgrantdeclarationsofparenthoodinsurrogacysituations:
thatquestioninvolvespolicyissuestobereviewedinPart2.
TheinternationalsurrogacyarrangementsthathaveappearedintheAustraliancaselawgenerallyfollowapattern.Thecommissioningcouplemakeanarrangementwherebyawoman,whoisnotrelatedtothecommissioningcoupleandisunknowntothembeforethearrangement,becomespregnantwithanembryocreatedfromthespermofoneofthecommissioningcoupleandaneggobtainedfromanotherwomanwhoisalsounrelatedtoandunknowntothecommissioningcouple.Theintentionisthatthechildwillbehandedtothecommissioningcoupleatbirthandbroughtupbythemastheirchild,andinallthecasesthisiswhathashappened.Bythetimethecasecomestocourt,thechildhasbeeninthecareofthecommissioningparentsforsomemonths,andhashadnocontactwiththebirthmotheroreggdonor.
WewillneedtoconsidercertainprovisionsoftheFamilyLawAct1975dealingwithparentageinparticularsituations.ButitisusefultoputthemincontextbyfirstconsideringwhatwouldotherwisebethepositionundertheFamilyLawAct.
Thereisnorelevantgenerallyapplicabledefinitionof‘parent’intheAct.Ithasbeenheldthattheword‘parent’whenusedintheActmeans‘apersonwhohasbegottenorborneachild’–abiologicalmotherorfatherofthechild,asdistinctfromapersonwhoismerelycaringforachildasaparentwoulddo.ItfollowsthatforthepurposeoftheFamilyLawActtheidentityofachild’sfather,motherorparentisprobablydeterminedbyreferencetofactsexistingatthetimeofthebirth.Thesubsequentcareofthechildwouldnotseemrelevanttodeterminingwhoisthe(biological)‘father’,‘mother’or‘parent’(ofcoursethecourtmaymakeordersplacingthechildinthecareofanon-parentifitconsidersthatdoingsowillbeinthechild’sbestinterests).
IfitwerenotforthespecificprovisionsoftheActthatwillbeexaminedbelow,identifyingthechild’sfatherinthetypicalcommercialsurrogacysituationwouldseemstraightforward.Ifthespermisthatofthemalecommissioningparent(oroneoftheminthecaseofasame-sexmalecouple),incircumstanceswhereeveryoneenvisagesthathewillactasthefather,hewouldnaturallybeseenasthebiologicalfather.Ifthespermhadcomefromsomeotherman,thecommissioningparentwouldnotbethefather.
Identifyingthemotheringestationalsurrogacysituations,however,wouldnotbequitesosimple.GiventheauthoritiestotheeffectthattheActreferstobiologicalparents,itseemsclearthatacommissioningwomanwhoseekstomotherthechild,buthasnobiologicalconnectionwiththechild,wouldnotbeseenasthechild’smotherundertheFamilyLawAct.Isthe‘mother’,then,thewomanwhogivesbirthtothechild?
Whenachildisborntoawomanfromherownegg,sheisobviouslythebiologicalmother.Butin‘gestational’surrogacysituationssuchasthoseintheinternationalcases,wemighthesitatetosaywhetherthe‘mother’istheeggdonororthewomanwhogavebirthtothechild.Neitherconformsentirelytotheconventionalmeaningofmother–theeggdonorprovidedhalfthechild’sgeneticinheritance,butwasnotpregnantwiththechild;
andthebirthmother,whowas,lacksageneticlinkwiththechild.Underthesurrogacyarrangement,neitherwomanisintendedtohavearoleinthechild’slife,butifwordslike‘parent’intheActrefertobiologicalparents,thismaynotnecessarilyprecludeeitherthebirthmotheroreggdonorfromthestatusofaparent.Onemightcontemplatethepossibilityofsomekindofrecognitionofbothwomen,butithasbeenpointedoutthatmanyprovisionsassumethatachildwillhaveonefatherandonemother,sothisdoesnotseemanoptionundertheFamilyLawActaspresentlydrafted.Aswewillsee,therearenowspecificlegislativeprovisionsaboutparentage,butasfarasweareawarethereisnoAustraliancourtdecisiononwhetherasidefromsuchspecificlegislationthe‘mother’ofachildbornfollowingeggdonationwouldbeseenasthebirthmotherortheeggdonor,orwhethertheanswermightturnonparticularcircumstances.
Inshort,intheabsenceofanylegislationspecificallydealingwiththequestion,inagestationalsurrogacysituationthemalecommissioningparentwhosuppliedthespermwouldprobablybethelegalfatherundertheFamilyLawAct,butitwouldbeuncertainwhetherthe‘mother’wouldbethebirthmotherortheeggdonor.
WenowconsidertheimpactofthespecificprovisionsoftheActrelatingtoparentage,startingwiththosethatcontainpresumptionsofparentage.
PresumptionsofparentageundertheAct
TheFamilyLawAct1975containsanumberofpresumptionsofparentage(wedealbelowwithsection60HBand60H,whichdonotcreatepresumptionsbutarerelevanttodeterminin
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- Commercial surrogacy some troubling family law
![提示](https://static.bdocx.com/images/bang_tan.gif)
链接地址:https://www.bdocx.com/doc/16199254.html