Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ethical Objections About Surrogacy in German Debates: A Critical Analysis

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Cross-Cultural Comparisons on Surrogacy and Egg Donation

Abstract

Surrogacy is prohibited by law in Germany. The chapter aims to provide a better understanding of the ethical objections that feed Germany’s restrictive stance. To this end, it does not only describe ethical objections being explicitly or implicitly raised in the academic discourse from the late 1980s until today but also examines their soundness by highlighting their underlying premises and confronting them with insights from international analyses. Given that concerns about children’s right to get to know their origin and surrogate mother’s instrumentalisation remain as most cogent objections from this analysis, some conditions for surrogacy that would have to be in place in order to mitigate these concerns are outlined.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Bibliography

  • Arbeitskreis Abstammungsrecht. (2017). Abschlussbericht. Empfehlungen für eine Reform des Abstammungsrechts, ed. Bundesministerium für Justiz und für Verbraucherschutz (BMJV). Köln: Bundesanzeiger Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arneson, R. J. (1992). Commodification and commercial surrogacy. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 21(2), 132–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beier, K. (2015). Surrogate motherhood: A trust-based approach. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 40(6), 631–652.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernhard, A. (2014). Kinder machen: Neue Reproduktionstechnologien und die Ordnung der Familie. Frankfurt am Main: S. Fischer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birnbacher, D. (2006). Natürlichkeit. Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bleisch, B. (2013). Leihmutterschaft als persönliche Beziehung. Jahrbuch für Wissenschaft und Ethik, 17(1), 5–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caleshue, C., Shiloh, S., Price, C., Sapp, J., & Biesecker, B. (2010). Invasive prenatal testing decisions in pregnancy after infertility. Prenatal Diagnosis, 30, 575–581.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coester-Waltjen, D. (1982). Rechtliche Probleme der für andere übernommenen Mutterschaft. Neue Juristische Wochenschrift, 35, 2528–2534.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diehl, A. (2014). Leihmutterschaft und Reproduktionstourismus. Frankfurt am Main: Wolfgang Metzner Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dietrich, S. (1989). Mutterschaft für Dritte. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duden, K. (2015). Leihmutterschaft im Internationalen Privat- und Verfahrensrecht. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felberbaum, R. E. (2009). Medizinische und ethische Aspekte der Leihmutterschaft. Gynäkologe, 42, 625–626.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, T., Bourne, K., Jadva, V., & Smith, V. (2014). Making connections. Contact between sperm donor relations. In T. Freeman, S. Graham, F. Ebtehaj, & M. Richards (Eds.), Relatedness in assisted reproduction (pp. 270–295). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • German Ethics Council. (2016). Embryospende, Embryoadoption und elterliche Verantwortung. Stellungnahme [online]. Available at http://www.ethikrat.org/dateien/pdf/stellungnahme-embryospende-embryoadoption-und-elterliche-verantwortung.pdf. Accessed 25 Jan 2017.

  • Golombok, S., Blake, L., Casey, P., Roman, G., & Jadva, V. (2013). Children born through reproductive donation: A longitudinal study of child adjustment. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 54, 653–660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graumann, S. (2003). Fortpflanzungsmedizin aus ethischer Sicht: alte und neue Fragen. In M. Düwell & K. Steigleder (Eds.), Bioethik. Eine Einführung (pp. 246–257). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Günther, H.-L., Taupitz, J., & Kaiser, P. (2014). Embryonenschutzgesetz. Juristischer Kommentar mit medizinisch-naturwissenschaftlichen Grundlagen. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (2003). The future of human nature. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanna, J. K. M. (2010). Revisiting child-based objections to commercial surrogacy. Bioethics, 27(7), 341–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hass, G., Grossmann, W., & Kallert, H. (1988). Leihmutterschaft. Psychische und psycho-soziale Folgen. Frankfurt am Main: Nelson Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrmann, B. (2006). Body Shopping? Der Körper zwischen Unverfügbarkeit und Vermarktung. In S. Ehm & S. Schicktanz (Eds.), Körper als Maß? Biomedizinische Eingriffe und ihre Auswirkungen auf Körper- und Identitätsverhältnisse (pp. 207–224). Stuttgart: S. Hirzel Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Konigorski, M. (2013). Der gemietete Bauch. Ethische Überlegungen zur Leihmutterschaft. Beitrag am 9.5.2013 im Deutschlandfunk [online]. Available at http://www.deutschlandfunk.de/der-gemietete-bauch.886.de.html?dram:article_id=246049. Accessed 25 Jan 2017.

  • Lane, M. (2003). Ethical issues in surrogacy arrangements. In R. Cook, S. D. Sclater, & F. Kaganas (Eds.), Surrogate motherhood: International perspectives (pp. 121–139). Oxford and Portland: Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, C., & Stoljar, N. (2000). Relational autonomy. Feminist perspectives on autonomy, agency and the social self. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer-Spendler, R. (2015). Ein schmaler Grat. Erfahrungen mit Leihmutterschaft in den USA. Mörfelden: FamART.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitra, S., & Schicktanz, S. (2016). Failed surrogate conceptions: Social and ethical aspects of preconception disruptions during commercial surrogacy in India. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine [online]. Available at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5075174/pdf/13010_2016_Article_40.pdf. Accessed 10 Dec 2017.

  • Ramskold, L. A. H., & Posner, M. P. (2013). Commercial surrogacy: How provisions of monetary remuneration and powers of international law can prevent exploitation of gestational surrogates. Journal of Medical Ethics, 39(6), 397–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saravanan, S. (2013). An ethnomethodological approach to examine exploitation in the context of capacity, trust and experience of commercial surrogacy in India. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, 8(10), 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schleissing, S. (Ed.). (2014). Ethik und Recht in der Fortpflanzungsmedizin. Herausforderungen – Diskussionen – Perspektiven. TTN Ethik interdisziplinär. München: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schliesser, C. (2016). Körperlichkeit und Kommerzialisierung: Zur theologisch-ethischen Problematik der Leihmutterschaft. Zeitschrift für medizinische Ethik, 62, 107–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shenfield, F., de Mouzon, J., Pennings, G., Ferraretti, A. P., Nyboe Andersen, A., de Wert, G., et al. (2010). Cross border reproductive care in six European countries. Human Reproduction, 25(6), 1361–1368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teman, E. (2008). The social construction of surrogacy research: An anthropological critique of the psychological scholarship on surrogate motherhood. Social Science and Medicine, 67, 1104–1112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teman, E. (2009). Embodying surrogate motherhood: Pregnancy as a dyadic body-project. Body & Society, 15(3), 47–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomale, C. (2015). Mietmutterschaft. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thorn, P., & Wischmann, T. (2010). Leitlinien des BKiD “Psychosoziale Beratung für Frauen und Männer, die eine Kinderwunschbehandlung im Ausland beabsichtigen”. Journal für Reproduktionsmedizin und Endokrinologie, 7(5), 394–402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tieu, M. M. (2009). Altruistic surrogacy: The necessary objectification of surrogate mothers. Journal of Medical Ethics, 35, 171–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Daele, W. (2002). Mensch nach Maß. Ethische Probleme der Genmanipulation und Gentherapie. München: C.H. Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Zyl, L. (2002). Intentional parenthood: Responsibilities in surrogate motherhood. Health Care Analysis, 10, 165–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Zyl, L., & Walker, R. (2013). Beyond altruistic and commercial contract motherhood: The professional model. Bioethics, 27(7), 373–381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weilert, A. K. (2013). Fortpflanzungsautonomie als Anspruch. Zeitschrift für Evangelische Ethik, 57, 48–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiesemann, C. (2006). Von der Verantwortung, ein Kind zu bekommen. München: C.H. Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeiler, K. (2004). Reproductive autonomous choice: A cherished illusion? Reproductive autonomy examined in the context of preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 7(2), 175–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany

    Katharina Beier

Authors
  1. Katharina Beier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katharina Beier .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany

    Sayani Mitra

  2. Department of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany

    Silke Schicktanz

  3. Department of Sociology, University of Delhi, New Delhi, India

    Tulsi Patel

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Beier, K. (2018). Ethical Objections About Surrogacy in German Debates: A Critical Analysis. In: Mitra, S., Schicktanz, S., Patel, T. (eds) Cross-Cultural Comparisons on Surrogacy and Egg Donation. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78670-4_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78670-4_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-78669-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-78670-4

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation