There has been a flurry of media activity concerning surrogacy arrangements in the wake of the baby Gammy case. Here is a round-up of different viewpoints to consider.
The article What chance for international surrogacy laws? on ABC’s The Drum by Sonja Van Wichelen focuses on the different legal regimes to consider in international surrogacy arrangements:
After the Baby Gammy controversy many have called for international surrogacy laws. But is this possible when countries have such vastly different notions of what constitutes a child and a parent?
The Conversation recently published an article Making surrogacy legal would violate the rights of children:
The current debate about commercial surrogacy has focused on the competing needs of couples or individuals desperate to have children, and the exploitation of vulnerable women in low-income countries. But no one seems to be talking about the rights of the child.
The Age published an article by Julie Szego, It sounds scary but renting a womb makes sense:
The mere fact that Australians are driven to unregulated markets overseas is not an argument for legalising commercial surrogacy here. But we have already determined that altruistic surrogacy does not pose a threat to the moral order. We are already OK with the idea of a woman agreeing to carry a child for someone else. We are just not OK with paying the woman for her trouble.
In the SMH, Renate Klein replied with this article: Baby Gammy has shown the need for debate on surrogacy
Rather than regulating a system that commodifies the resulting child and invariably uses women as “containers” for carrying and birthing a baby they are taught to say is not theirs, we need to focus on the demand for surrogacy and try to reduce it.
You can read information on the legal status of parenthood in NSW from the Find Legal Answers website here.