Advertisement

The Professions and Professional Ethics

Chapter
  • 380 Downloads

Abstract

The professional model requires support from the relevant professionals to all parties during the process. This chapter outlines the distinct role of each of these professions, namely legal and medical practitioners, social workers, counsellors, nurses and midwives. All surrogacy arrangements, traditional or gestational, are formal. They have to be approved and conducted through fertility clinics. All surrogates must be registered to ensure that they are medically and psychological healthy and have the necessary ethical awareness and appreciation of the duties they have towards the intended baby and the intended parents. Similarly, the intended parents must understand their responsibilities to the surrogate as well as her rights. She cannot keep the baby but she has other important rights as a patient and autonomous person.

References

  1. Association of Clinical Embryologists, British Fertility Society and Royal College of Nursing. (2011). Multiple births from fertility treatment in the UK: A consensus statement. Human Fertility, 14(3), 151–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Botterell, A., & McLeod, C. (2016). Licensing parents in international contract pregnancies. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 33(2), 178–196.CrossRefGoogle 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. Dahl, B., Margrethe Fylkesnes, A., Sørlie, V., & Malterud, K. (2013). Lesbian women’s experiences with healthcare providers in the birthing context: A meta-ethnography. Midwifery, 29(6), 674–681.Google Scholar
  6. Dar, S., Lazer, T., Swanson, S., et al. (2015). Assisted reproduction involving gestational surrogacy: An analysis of the medical, psychosocial and legal issues: Experience from a large surrogacy program. Human Reproduction, 30(2), 345–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. de Lacey, S. L., Peterson, K., & McMillan, J. (2015). Child interests in assisted reproductive technology: How is the welfare principle applied in practice? Human Reproduction, 30(3), 616–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 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
  9. European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. (2001). Guidelines for counselling in infertility: Special interest group ‘psychology and counselling’. Belgium: ESHRE. https://www.eshre.eu/Specialty-groups/Special-Interest-Groups/Psychology-Counselling/Archive/Guidelines.aspx.
  10. European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. (2015). Routine psychosocial care in infertility and medically assisted reproduction—a guide for fertility staff. Belgium: ESHRE.Google Scholar
  11. Hale, B. (2014). New families and the welfare of children. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 36(1), 26–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Harbottle, S., Hughes, C., Cutting, R., et al. (2015). Elective single embryo transfer: An update to UK best practice guidelines. Human Fertility, 18(3), 165–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hayman, B., Wilkes, L., Halcomb, E. J., & Jackson, D. (2013). Marginalised mothers: Lesbian women negotiating heteronormative healthcare services. Contemporary Nurse: A Journal for the Australian Nursing Profession, 44(1), 120–127.Google Scholar
  14. Horsey, K. (2016). Fraying at the edges: UK surrogacy law in 2015. Medical Law Review, 24(4), 608-621.Google Scholar
  15. Jacobs, M. B. (2006). Procreation through ART: Why the adoption process should not apply. Capital University Law Review, 35(2), 399–411.Google Scholar
  16. Leese, B., & Denton, J. (2010). Attitudes towards single embryo transfer, twin and higher order pregnancies in patients undergoing infertility treatment: A review. Human Fertility, 13(1), 28–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ministry of Health. (2016). Immunisation for pregnant women. Wellington: Ministry of Health. http://www.health.govt.nz/your-health/healthy-living/immunisation/immunisation-pregnant-women?gclid=CIukk8K7rs8CFYKavAodIUsCrw.
  18. Norré, J., & Wischmann, T. (2011). The position of the fertility counsellor in a fertility team: A critical appraisal. Human Fertility, 14(3), 154–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine and Practice Committee of the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. (2015). Recommendations for practices utilizing gestational carriers: A committee opinion. Fertility and Sterility, 103(1), e1–e8.Google Scholar
  20. Purewal, S., Crawshaw, M., & van den Akker, O. (2012). Completing the surrogate motherhood process: Parental order reporters’ attitudes towards surrogacy arrangements, role ambiguity and role conflict. Human Fertility, 15(2), 94–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Reilly, D. R. (2007). Surrogate pregnancy: A guide for Canadian prenatal health care providers. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 176(4), 483–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Roberts, S. A., McGowan, L., Vail, A., & Brison, D. R. (2011). The use of single embryo transfer to reduce the incidence of twins: Implications and questions for practice from the “towardSET?” project. Human Fertility, 14(2), 89–96.Google Scholar
  23. Rotabi, K. S., Bromfield, N. F., & Fronek, P. (2015). International private law to regulate commercial global surrogacy practices: Just what are social work’s practical policy recommendations? International Social Work, 58(4), 575–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Scientific Advisory Committee of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. (2011). Multiple pregnancy following assisted reproduction. Human Fertility, 14(1), 3–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Teman, E. (2010). Birthing a mother: The surrogate body and the pregnant self. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wang, A. Y., Dill, S. K., Bowman, M., & Sullivan, E. A. (2016). Gestational surrogacy in Australia 2004–2011: Treatment, pregnancy and birth outcomes. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 56(3), 255–259.Google Scholar
  27. White, P. M. (2016). Hidden from view: Canadian gestational surrogacy practices and outcomes, 2001–2012. Reproductive Health Matters, 24(47), 205–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wilson, C., & Leese, B. (2013). Do nurses and midwives have a role in promoting the well-being of patients during their fertility journey? A review of the literature. Human Fertility, 16(1), 2–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of WaikatoHamiltonNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations