Advertisement

Law and Regulation

Chapter
  • 412 Downloads

Abstract

Without certainty over legal parentage, the intended parents cannot trust the surrogate completely. The professional model uses the agreement to establish the parental rights of the intended parents before the surrogate becomes pregnant. She is never the legal mother of the baby and so does not relinquish it. This removes the problem of transferring parental rights, whether by adoption or some other mechanism. Intention is the basis of legal parentage rather than genetic relationship, gestation or best interests. Once a pregnancy is established no one can change their minds.

References

  1. Altenhofen, S., Clyman, R., Little, C., et al. (2013). Attachment security in three-year-olds who entered substitute care in infancy. Infant Mental Health Journal, 34(5), 435–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bainham, A. (2008). Arguments about parentage. Cambridge Law Journal, 67(02), 322–351.Google Scholar
  3. Chervenak, F. A., & McCullough, L. B. (2009). How should the obstetrician respond to surrogate pregnancy? Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 33(2), 131–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Crawshaw, M., Purewal, S., & van den Akker, O. (2013). Working at the margins: The views and experiences of court social workers on parental orders work in surrogacy arrangements. British Journal of Social Work, 43(6), 1225–1243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Drabiak-Syed, K. (2011). Currents in contemporary bioethics: Waiving informed consent to prenatal screening and diagnosis? Problems with paradoxical negotiation in surrogacy contracts. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 39(3), 559–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gerber, P., & O’Byrne, K. (2015). Souls in the house of tomorrow: The rights of children born via surrogacy. In P. Gerber & K. O’Byrne (Eds.), Surrogacy, law and human rights (pp. 81–112). Burlington: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  7. Gheaus, A. (2012). The right to parent one’s biological baby. Journal of Political Philosophy, 20(4), 432–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gheaus A. (2016). The normative importance of pregnancy challenges surrogacy contracts. Analize: Journal of Gender and Feminist Studies, 20(6), 20–31.Google Scholar
  9. Jacobs, M. B. (2006). Procreation through ART: Why the adoption process should not apply. Capital University Law Review, 35(2), 399–411.Google Scholar
  10. Jacobson, H. (2016). Labor of love: Gestational surrogacy and the work of making babies. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Jenkins, J. M., McGowan, P., & Knafo-Noam, A. (2016). Parent–offspring transaction: Mechanisms and the value of within family designs. Hormones and Behavior, 77, 53–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lorenceau, E. S., Mazzucca, L., Tisseron, S., & Pizitz, T. D. (2015). A cross-cultural study on surrogate mother’s empathy and maternal–foetal attachment. Women and Birth, 28, 154–159.Google Scholar
  13. Margalit, Y. (2014). In defense of surrogacy agreements: A modern contract law perspective. William & Mary Journal of Women and the Law, 20(2), 423–468.Google Scholar
  14. Millbank, J. (2015). Rethinking ‘commercial’ surrogacy in Australia. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 12(3), 477–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). (1990) Convention on the Rights of the Child. Available at: http://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crc.aspx.
  16. Porter, L. (2015). Gestation and parental rights: Why is good enough good enough? Feminist Philosophy Quarterly, 1(1), 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Redshaw, M., & Martin, C. (2013). Babies, ‘bonding’ and ideas about parental ‘attachment’. Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 31(3), 219–221.Google Scholar
  18. Schoenmaker, C., Juffer, F., van Ijzendoorn, M. H., et al. (2015). From maternal sensitivity in infancy to adult attachment representations: A longitudinal adoption study with secure base scripts. Attachment & Human Development, 17(3), 241–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Storrow, R. F. (2015). Surrogacy: American style. In P. Gerber & K. O’Byrne (Eds.), Surrogacy, law and human rights (pp. 193–216). Burlington: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  20. Van den Dries, L., Juffer, F., van Ijzendoorn, M. H., & Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J. (2009). Fostering security? A meta-analysis of attachment in adopted children. Children and Youth Services Review, 31(3), 410–421.Google Scholar
  21. Van der Voort, A., Juffer, F., & Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J. (2014). Sensitive parenting is the foundation for secure attachment relationships and positive social-emotional development of children. Journal of Children’s Services, 9(2), 165–176.Google Scholar
  22. Walsh, J. (2010). Definitions matter: If maternal–fetal relationships are not attachment, what are they? Archives of Women’s Mental Health, 13(5), 449–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Walsh, J., Hepper, E. G., Bagge, S. R., et al. (2013). Maternal–fetal relationships and psychological health: Emerging research directions. Journal of Reproductive & Infant Psychology, 31(5), 490–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of WaikatoHamiltonNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations