A shift from home to the market: The marketization of reproductive labor in India

Commercial surrogacy marketizes life's work. In the era of neo-liberalism, women's work, which is often intimately performed within a heterosexual marriage in exchange of support, now remains a principal avenue to earn money. This form of feminization of labor has led to the emergence of markets for women's reproductive capacities. The present study stems from my ethnographic journey into the lives of the women who work as surrogate mothers in India. The narratives presented in the paper emerge from my prolonged fieldwork in Anand, Gujarat. It engages with the experiences, understandings, and the voices of these women, who I term reproductive laborers, in order to examine the notion of putting one's reproductive capacities in this intimate market for money.

Surrogacy and public policy

The Supreme Court in the United Kingdom has held that it is not contrary to public policy to award damages in tort to fund a commercial surrogacy in another jurisdiction where this is lawful. This significant decision, in the case of Whittington Hospital NHS Trust v XX [2020] UKSC 14, will potentially have an impact on the regulation and reform of surrogacy law in the United Kingdom, Ireland and internationally. The judgment delivered by Lady Hale draws attention to multiple inconsistencies in the law, and it highlights, in particular, the need for effective regulation of domestic surrogacy. Legislators face an important and imminent challenge to reconcile the reality of commercial surrogacy with a deficient legal framework. This article seeks to highlight some of the important issues which this case has raised when considering regulation and reform of surrogacy law.

Parenthood, altruism, and the market: a critique of essentialist constructions of women’s nature in commercial surrogacy

Commercial surrogacy has become an increasingly popular path to parenthood around the world. Yet, critics have raised concerns about the practice’s implications for gender inequality. This paper critically assesses commercial surrogacy’s reliance on, and reinforcement of, common narratives about women’s natural disposition to sacrifice themselves for others. These narratives have historically served to justify disadvantages for women as workers, both within and outside the household. Their presence in commercial surrogacy agreements suggests that, even if we can characterise commercial surrogacy as an alternative (as opposed to traditional) method for family formation, the same social stereotypes that have historically entrenched women’s inequality in traditional families are still highly relevant for the practice’s functioning.

Surrogacy Arrangements Act 1985

This chapter covers the Surrogacy Arrangements Act 1985 and includes topics on Surrogacy and Prohibition of Commercial Surrogacy.

EXPRESS: Why is it Wrong to Sell Your Body? Understanding Liberals’ vs. Conservatives’ Moral Objections to Bodily Markets

People hold strong moral objections to commercial bodily markets – the buying and selling of the human body and its components (e.g., prostitution; commercial surrogacy; trade of kidneys, blood plasma, sperm, ovum, and hair). This research takes a descriptive approach to understand why people object to the marketing of the human body and how their moral objections differ across the political spectrum. The authors propose that liberals and conservatives find bodily markets to be morally wrong; however, the two groups object to bodily markets for different reasons. Liberals are more sensitive to exploitation concerns, but conservatives are more sensitive to violation of sanctity concerns in these markets. Real-world observational data and controlled experiments test these predictions. The findings show how socio-political leaders utilize the different moral objections to persuade their respective audiences, such as how conservative versus more liberal pastors sermonize differently on prostitution. Second, results show how targeted marketing campaigns encourage liberals and conservatives to participate in consumer advocacy and donate to political causes. Third, findings outline how liberals and conservatives support different regulatory laws that penalize buyers versus sellers. Finally, results show how the different moral objections manifest for live bodily products but not for dead bodily products.

What makes a parent in surrogacy cases? Reflections on the Fjölnisdóttir et al. v. Iceland decision of the European Court of Human Rights

The present commentary analyses and discusses the Fjölnisdóttir et al. v. Iceland decision of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) of 18 May 2021. The case concerned an Icelandic couple who had been recognised as the legal parents of a child born by a surrogate mother in California. In contrast to most other surrogacy cases decided by the ECtHR, however, the child had no biological link to either of the intended parents. The ECtHR thus found that a ruling of the Supreme Court of Iceland which had rejected the recognition of the legal parenthood of the intended parents under Icelandic law had not violated Art. 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, despite the fact that joint adoption by the intended parents was not possible in this case. The present commentary argues that this decision overexaggerates the importance of the biological link, creating injustices at the expense of the child concerned. In conclusion, the commentary calls for a more consistent and holistic framework to protect the best interests of the child and to prevent abuses of transnational commercial surrogacy.

Surrogacy and public policy

The Supreme Court in the United Kingdom has held that it is not contrary to public policy to award damages in tort to fund a commercial surrogacy in another jurisdiction where this is lawful. This significant decision, in the case of Whittington Hospital NHS Trust v XX [2020] UKSC 14, will potentially have an impact on the regulation and reform of surrogacy law in the United Kingdom, Ireland and internationally. The judgment delivered by Lady Hale draws attention to multiple inconsistencies in the law, and it highlights, in particular, the need for effective regulation of domestic surrogacy. Legislators face an important and imminent challenge to reconcile the reality of commercial surrogacy with a deficient legal framework. This article seeks to highlight some of the important issues which this case has raised when considering regulation and reform of surrogacy law.

Ethical context of legally regulated surrogate and genetic motherhood in Russia

Aim: to assess the compliance of legal norms regulating surrogate motherhood and moral concepts about motherhood and childhood in society.Materials and Methods. The Articles 55 (clause 9) of the Federal Law "On the Fundamentals of Health Protection of Citizens in the Russian Federation", the principles of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, and traditional moral concepts common in society of the Russian Federation underwent a comparative analysis.Results. Discrepancies between moral and legal norms were revealed in 3 issues. Issue 1 is related to the rights for surrogacy of unmarried persons and the rights of single citizens. In an ethical context, the statement of their rights does not correspond to the rights of children to a dignified upbringing in a family composed of a mother and father. Issue 2 refers to the ethical incorrectness of compensated surrogacy contracts. Commercial surrogacy cannot be separated from transformed forms of child trafficking. Issue 3 is related to the moral degradation of motherhood upon using technologies of surrogate and genetic motherhood.Conclusion. It is necessary to conduct additional studies on using surrogate motherhood in order to prevent abuse and violations upon its application in Russia as well as open up a public discussion on this matter.