German Law on Surrogacy and Egg Donation: The Legal Logic of Restrictions

  • Sabrina Dücker
  • Tatjana Hörnle


In this chapter, we describe the German legal prohibitions against egg donation and surrogacy. We explore how German physicians and other persons are criminally liable if they provide information about services at reproductive clinics abroad that are prohibited within Germany by the German law. The main discussion of this chapter addresses concerns pertaining to the family and private international law that arise once a baby has been born through surrogacy aborad and the intended parents travel to their home country with the child. We show how the courts increasingly accept solutions serving the wellbeing of children rather than enforcing the strict German stance against surrogacy. Finally, we take a critical look at the current legal situation recommending to change the German law and to replace absolute prohibitions with controlled and supervised procedures for egg donation and surrogacy.


  1. Birnbacher, D. (1996). Ambiguities in the concept of Menschenwürde. In K. Bayertz (Ed.), Sanctity of life and human dignity (pp. 107–121). Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  2. Brunet, L., Carruthers, J., Davaki, K., King, D., Marzo, C., & Marzo, C. (2013). A comparative study on the regime of surrogacy in EU member states. Available at Accessed 27 June 2017.
  3. Coester-Waltjen, D. (2016). Family forms and parenthood in Germany. In A. Büchler & H. Keller (Eds.), Family forms and parenthood. Theory and practice of article 8 ECHR in Europe (pp. 201–236). Cambridge: Intersentia. Google Scholar
  4. Conklin, C. (2014). Simply inconsistent: Surrogacy laws in the United States and the pressing need for regulation. Women’s Rights Law Reporter, 35, 67.Google Scholar
  5. Dethloff, N. (2014). Leihmütter, Wunscheltern und ihre Kinder. Juristenzeitung, 69, 922.Google Scholar
  6. Dethloff, N. (2015). Changing family forms: Challenges for German law. Victoria University of Wellington Law Review, 46, 671.Google Scholar
  7. Dethloff, N. (2016). Anmerkung. Juristenzeitung, 71, 207.Google Scholar
  8. Dethloff, N., & Ramser, C. (2007). Tensions between biological and social conceptions of parentage in German Law. In I. Schwenzer (Ed.), Tensions between biological and social conceptions of parentage (pp. 177–210). Cambridge: Intersentia. Google Scholar
  9. Duden, K. (2015a). Leihmutterschaft im Internationalen Privat-und Verfahrensrecht. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.Google Scholar
  10. Duden, K. (2015b). International surrogate motherhood: Shifting the focus to the child. Zeitschrift für Europäisches Privatrecht, 23, 637–660.Google Scholar
  11. Engel, M. (2014). Cross-border surrogacy: Time for a convention. In K. Boele-Woelki, N. Dethloff, & W. Gephart (Eds.), Family law and culture in Europe. Developments, challenges and opportunities (pp. 199–216). Cambridge et al.: Intersentia.Google Scholar
  12. Gassner, U. et al. (2013). Fortpflanzungsmedizingesetz, Augsburg-Münchner Entwurf. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.Google Scholar
  13. Golombok, G., Readings, J., Blake, L., Casey, P., Marks, A., & Jadva, V. (2011). Families created through surrogacy: Mother-child relationships and children’s psychological adjustment at age 7. Developmental Psychology, 47, 1579–1588.Google Scholar
  14. Gössl, S. (2013). Country-report: Germany. In K. Trimmings & P. Beaumont (Eds.), International surrogacy arrangements. Legal regulation at the international level (pp. 131–142). Oxford and Portland: Hart.Google Scholar
  15. Helms, T. (2016). Rechtliche, biologische und soziale Elternschaft: Herausforderungen durch neue Familienformen. Gutachten F zum 71. Deutschen Juristentag. München: C.H. Beck.Google Scholar
  16. Hörnle, T. (2013). Menschenwürde und Ersatzmutterschaft. In J. Joerden, E. Hilgendorf, & F. Thiele (Eds.), Menschenwürde und Medizin. Ein interdisziplinäres Handbuch (pp. 743–754). Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.Google Scholar
  17. Hüppe, H. (2015). Legalisierung der Eizellspende? Zeitschrift für Rechtspolitik, 48, 126.Google Scholar
  18. Jadva, J., Imrie, S., & Golombok, S. (2014). Surrogate mothers 10 years on: A longitudinal study of psychological well-being and relationships with the parents and child. Human Reproduction, 30, 373.Google Scholar
  19. Knecht, M. (2017). Reproduktives Reisen und die Herstellung von Verwandtschaft. Available at Accessed 13 Aug 2017.
  20. Kreß, H. (2013). Samenspende und Leihmutterschaft: Problemstand, Rechtsunsicherheiten, Regelungsansätze. Familie, Partnerschaft, Recht, 240–243.Google Scholar
  21. Lehmann, M. (2007). Die In-vitro-Fertilisation und ihre Folgen. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  22. Mayer Lewis, B. (2017). Lebensweltlicher Ansatz, individuelle Sicht der Problematik [pdf]. Available at Accessed 13 Aug 2017.
  23. Müller-Terpitz, R. (2016). ‘ESchG 2.0’: Plädoyer für eine partielle Reform des Embryonen-schutzgesetzes. Zeitschrift für Rechtspolitik, 49, 51.Google Scholar
  24. Resnik, D. B. (2001). Regulating the market for human eggs. Bioethics, 15, 1–25.Google Scholar
  25. Rost, C. (2014). Kinderwunsch in der Grauzone. Süddeutsche Zeitung [online]. Available at Accessed 27 June 2017.
  26. Spiewak, M. (2013). Strafsache Kinderwunsch, DIE ZEIT [online]. Available at Accessed 27 June 2017.
  27. Valerius, B. (2017). Kinderwunschbehandlungen im Ausland. Zeitschrift für Medizinstrafrecht, 3, 20–27.Google Scholar
  28. Wiesemann, C. (2017). Streitgespräch: Der ethisch angemessene Umgang mit den bestehenden Problemen. Available at Accessed 13 Aug 2017.
  29. Wilson, T. (2017). Unravelling orders in a borderless Europe? Cross-border reproductive care and the paradoxes of assisted reproductive technology policy in Germany and Poland. Available at Accessed 27 June 2017.

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sabrina Dücker
    • 1
  • Tatjana Hörnle
    • 1
  1. 1.Humboldt-Universität zu BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations