Surrogacy laws to be overhauled under new reforms – benefitting the child, surrogate and intended parents - Law Commission proposals

[IwantToRetire]

The Law Commissions’ report and draft legislation, the culmination of a detailed review, outlines a new regulatory regime that offers more clarity, safeguards and support – for the child, surrogate and parents who will raise the child (“the intended parents”).

Under the reforms, a new system governing surrogacy agreements, “the new pathway”, would come into force – the first time that the law has introduced a route for surrogacy where scrutiny of arrangements starts pre-conception.
Overseen by non-profit organisations operating under a regulatory body, the Commissions’ new pathway would ensure rigorous pre-conception screening and safeguarding. If the right conditions are met, it would allow intended parents to become the legal parents of the child from birth, subject to the surrogate’s right to withdraw her consent.

The new system would improve the current process, which involves a sometimes complex and lengthy journey through the courts after the child has been born, resulting in some couples waiting up to a year after birth before they become legal parents of the child.

https://www.lawcom.gov.uk/surrogacy-laws-to-be-overhauled-under-new-reforms-benefitting-the-child-surrogate-and-intended-parents/

Really only posting to make others aware of this report (I couldn't find a thread about it so hope its not a duplicate).

Article (from a man's perspective!) https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/women-are-being-ignored-again-in-the-surrogacy-debate/

Response from Nordic Model Now https://nordicmodelnow.org/2023/04/01/ask-your-mp-to-say-no-to-commercial-style-surrogacy-in-the-uk/

Can you post that follow up study please @Londisc?

Surely, from a reasonable perspective, this is all about feelings?

Mmm. The feelings of those who want to procure babies seem to mean that "ongoing consent" will be their vehicle to ride roughshod over women's consent. To freely consent is about how you feel. I just don't see how that's possible in the context of getting pregnant, being pregnant, giving birth, and all the postpartum issues that there are. Presumably it isn't possible to give free consent which is why this "catch" is being built in. And that's without even thinking about the baby. Which no one is thinking of unless it's as something to procure.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5611761/

I agree. Feelings do not create reality.

Feeling that you desperately want a child, deserve to have a child, does not excuse the:

• intentional commissioning of a human being because you want to own one
• with the fixed intention from conception of removing it from its mother, (and you can pretend all you like that other more comfortable words replace that reality but it doesn't go away)
• risking the trauma and harm to that child from your desire to own it trumping your care for that child
• skipping all safeguards normally involved in adoption, which this is
• putting a woman in the position of risking her life and health and working hard to remove her option of saying no if she changes her mind since you've bought her child
• enabling human trafficking which will inevitably be horrifically abused, harming women and children, for rich consumers.

"I've had a baby and baby wants its mum and that's that" is not going to have any effect on decision-makers. Maybe try a different approach.

If it is acceptable to ‘procure’ a child, it should be acceptable to ‘procure’ a husband or wife.

This is an excellent point. One I'll remember when I do write to my MP about this.

To be fair the whole of surrogacy hinges on the pre-agreement/consent before the baby is born aspect:
If I had a baby, and then wanted to sell it that wouldn't be allowed.
If I got pregnant through a donated egg etc and then had the baby and wanted to sell it (even if only for the "expenses" incurred through IVF and being pregnant) that wouldn't be allowed.
If I agree before getting pregnant that I will sell the baby, that is allowed. The law change now just means that it is much harder to back out of the agreement to sell said child. But this is fine and in everyone's best interests apparently.

Weird.

I know commercial surrogacy isnt legal in the UK. But even just covering the costs of pregnancy through selling my children isn't allowed. Neither is me going to another country and buying a baby allowed. Unless the agreement is made before the pregnancy.

Yes. This.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the recommendations became law.
I’m struggling to comprehend the implied consent and the complete lack of thought for the rights of the woman (surrogate) and child born.
Gilead here we come.

^I know commercial surrogacy isnt legal in the UK. But...^

There are no buts. In the UK the birth mother in a surrogacy arrangement does not pay any costs and does not make any money. There is no reason to do it other than wanting to.

At least EndlessTea is honest about the fact she just doesn't like the principle of a woman voluntarily carrying a pregnancy for someone else, be that sister, friend or anyone in fact. I'm sure you can find an MP you don't f-ing detest, with children of their own and who sits on an appropriate committe, to write to if you do a little research.

There are no buts. In the UK the birth mother in a surrogacy arrangement does not pay any costs and does not make any money. There is no reason to do it other than wanting to.

According to surrogacy agency Brilliant Beginnings, surrogate mothers typically receive between £12,000 -£20,000 in expenses. If you don't think many women aren't tempted by that kind of money, you're very naive.

This is correct, babies should NEVER be separated from their mother unless absolutely necessary. The woman who carries and births a baby IS the mother, always, regardless of how baby was conceived.