Woman asking nhs to pay for US surrogacy

She might be entitled to financial compensation, but expecting the NHS to procure a service abroad that is illegal here surely must be illegal for the NHS to go along with. She should look into fostering or adopting if she wants children. The money she has been awarded can help her a lot by purchasing a family home.

I am so disappointed in Lady Hale’s comments and confused by what’s been said. How can UK taxpayers pay for someone to travel overseas for commercial, contractually binding surrogacy that isn’t legal in the UK?

There’s a Department of Health source from 2018 here (only applicable to England and Wales) which includes the ‘government approval’ mantra, which seems to be being trotted out at the moment as if it should close down debate around surrogacy.
What an odd argument. Quick- we’d better stop debating the government Coronavirus response, how much of our tax money the government should give to the NHS or what our Brexit policies should be... because the government already has a position on that?

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/843890/Surrogacy_guidance_for_intended_parents_and_surrogates.pdf

Surrogacy is increasingly becoming an option for starting a family for people who are unable to conceive a child themselves. This guidance is intended to give the reader key information about surrogacy and the relevant legal process in the UK.
The Government supports surrogacy as part of the range of assisted conception options. Our view is that surrogacy is a pathway, starting with deciding which surrogacy organisation to work with, deciding which surrogate or intended parent(s) (IP(s)) to work with, reaching an agreement about how things will work, trying to get pregnant, supporting each other through pregnancy and then birth, applying for a parental order to transfer legal parenthood and then helping your child understand the circumstances of their birth. This guidance gives more information about each stage.

Whats the source for where the UK government has ‘supported’ UK surrogacy taking place outside of IVF clinics, or anywhere the government have supported commercial surrogacy within or outside of the UK?

I also note how the language implies surrogacy as ‘work’ here- well if it’s ‘work’ then where’s the workplace pension, tax, insurance, training, workplace regulations and protections and working hours restrictions for surrogates..?

People absolutely should be able to sue the NHS in cases of gross negligence as money is often the only thing that makes anyone listen/ get change.

All those babies that died unnecessarily at the same hosp as an example. Dismissing all cases as 'mistakes' means much less likelihood of improvement, and also is a pretty shit thing for the parents. Oh it was just a mistake. Plenty of other cases.

Also, for general information for anyone reading this thread, how many people knew that in Scotland and Wales the NHS will pay for surrogate IVF (the impregnation of a surrogate) as part of fertility treatments available.
I didn't, I just recently came across this snippet in the consultation paper having missed it previously.

I'm not arguing the point Dido , you obviously have legal understanding that I don't and the precise meanings of words likely differ for you and me, not to mention your knowledge of how law evolves and its interpretation in respect of this case. But here is a page from the short summary of the consultation.

Guidance from The Dept of Health and Social Care states:

"The government supports surrogacy as part of the range of assisted conception options."

For what it's worth, if I, in my past life as a midwife, and in the absence of this consultation, read that line I would interpret it as an instruction to be pragmatic and non judgmental, that pregnant women arriving in the antenatal clinic claiming their pregnancy was a surrogate arrangement, still were entitled to the same standard of maternity care as any other pregnant woman. There's a big leap from that "support" to going hell for leather promoting it, creating new laws to tighten the protections for the commissioning parents at the expense of protecting the woman giving birth to the baby, paying for women to have surrogate babies in the USA etc

I don’t think people should be able to Sue the NHS. It costs them too, mistakes happen.

But the consultation takes as its starting point what Lady Hale said

"The government now supports surrogacy as a valid way of creating family relationships,"

No it doesn't. "Supports surrogacy" is not the same as what she said and she is pre-empting the outcome.

As for appealing - this was the appeal to the Supreme Court. Is there any higher body to go to? Maybe a European court but I don't know where UK stands with that what with Brexit....

I contacted my MP and had a telephone call with him a couple of weeks ago. He knew nothing about the consultation and seemed genuinely shocked about some of the proposals. He's a staunch Catholic so I expected him to be on side. (I don't think we're meant to name our MPs in these discussions?) Anyway he's quite high up/influential. He has written to me to say he has written to the Lord Chancellor. I'm going to forward this judgement to him. I don't know. Can he speak to the Lord Chancellor? Can the Lord Chancellor do anything?

But the consultation takes as its starting point what Lady Hale said

"The government now supports surrogacy as a valid way of creating family relationships,"

And it certainly doesn't seek to debate whether surrogacy should be allowed. It seeks to open it up to commercial interests and change the law around acquisition of legal parenthood in favour of commissioning parents.

Ereshkigalangcleg

There is no consensus that the UK public no longer considers commercial surrogacy repugnant

Genuine ignorant question, Dido -is that mandate needed for legal change?

No, judicial led law evolves as society and attitudes change. It's an organic process- something which used to be acceptable no longer is.

Given there is an ongoing consultation on surrogacy I cannot see how that evolution can possibly have happened.

Appealing will cost money though. The NHS may decide it's not worth it, but then risk opening the floodgates.

God I hope there is some kind of appeal. This judgement at this time is bloody awful. No way should the NHS that can't provide PPE for frontline medical staff or enough ventilators for sick people for that matter be funding shit like this.

There is no consensus that the UK public no longer considers commercial surrogacy repugnant,

Genuine ignorant question, Dido -is that mandate needed for legal change?

“It is no longer contrary to public policy to award damages for the costs of a foreign commercial surrogacy......"

It is an accepted legal principle that changes and evolution in law can be judge led rather than statutory. The most obvious example is marital rape.

But that principle cannot possibly apply in the case of commercial surrogacy. There is no consensus that the UK public no longer considers commercial surrogacy repugnant.c

Wow! So is this the end or would the NHS appeal?

What bad timing to be putting additional stress on the NHS.

Well this is a disgusting judgement. Upsetting though the medical negligence and consequences are, gives this couple NO right to put another woman's (or 4?) body and life in jeopardy. Disgusting.

I don't like to diss women generally, but this woman is a selfish bint.

I think that's right Fanny the compensation was settled some time ago but this case came after that and appears to have been treated as a separate thing, so a load of cash awarded for the medical negligence, which I think was, quite rightly awarded (although I've no idea how the amount compares with other similar cases) and it could be roughly 4,000k on top as a surrogacy arrangement in the US with lawyers, life insurance in addition to the egg harvesting and IVF as well as all pregnancy scans and tests and then the actual commercial surrogacy bill is approx £100k x 4 babies to 'complete' her family.

I wonder what her husband and family Male of all this and as a PP said, I wonder who had the money to take the case to the Supreme Court. That's not cheap, if self-funded then she could have skipped that process and paid for the surrogacy herself.

This woman is hellbent on revenge, at the cost of the NHS it appears.

Indeed KenDodd - is the NHS expected to fund air travel to California for her and her partner/husband, hotel bills, all the other expenses that will accrue from this venture? Four times?

I can't remember and I'm feeling a bit grumpy so I can't be bothered to check my facts but iirc she has received or been awarded some £500 K compensation but wasn't expected to dip into that to fund her surrogacy dreams. This is on top of the compensation. Is there even an upper limit to the expense? Or is it four babies, whatever it costs?

Wayhay! Ta! I’m going right out to... oh hang on, that’s right... for a quick run around the park.

Can someone help me out there, please?

Here you are, you poor thing, have half a million of my taxes.

Horrified by this verdict, seems against our laws and morals. Also a huge amount of money taken away from our NHS

So it appears she be going to California at the NHS expense and having another woman have a child for her. Tell me, if the child is born prematurely or with very significant health problems that need treatment before she can come home, will the NHS also have to pay for that treatment? If this child was the fourth, and should sadly die from the above, does the NHS have to pay for a fifth?

There is so much wrong with this judgment.

I think I deserve hmmm, to win the lottery, to be 30 years younger, to be smarter, to have my parents still alive, to look like Isabella Rosselini...

Can someone help me out there, please?

Having a baby is not a human right, nor does it save your life

This.

I am "socially infertile" (didn't meet the right bloke etc etc etc) - do I demand that "the government" or "the taxpayer" or the NHS or someone else other than me should pay for me to have a baby?

No way.

Damages for negligence, but not more money from a very stretched NHS.

Not having children is not a disaster. I'm still fully human