Surrogacy and the significance of gestation: Implications for law and policy

IF 1.7 2区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS
Bioethics Pub Date : 2024-06-01 DOI:10.1111/bioe.13302
Andrea Mulligan
{"title":"Surrogacy and the significance of gestation: Implications for law and policy","authors":"Andrea Mulligan","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13302","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Gestational surrogacy is ethically complex, generating very different responses in law and policy worldwide. This paper argues that contemporary surrogacy law and policy, across many jurisdictions, fail to give sufficient attention to the significance of the relationship between the child and the gestational surrogate. This failure risks repeating the mistakes of historical, discredited approaches to adoption and donor-assisted conception. This paper argues that proper recognition of the significance of gestation must be an organising principle in surrogacy law and policy. The paper begins by pointing to examples of surrogacy law and practice where the role of the gestator is unacceptably minimised, most notably the framing of the surrogate as a mere ‘carrier’. It goes on to examine the nature of gestation, including consideration of contemporary scholarship on the metaphysics of pregnancy and emerging work in epigenetics, and argues that current evidence supports the view that the gestational relationship must be taken more seriously than it currently is. The paper then draws analogies with parenthood in donor-assisted conception and adoption to argue that approaches to parental status in novel family formations that fail to promote transparency and seek to deny the truth of familial relationships are doomed to fail. The paper concludes by suggesting some implications for law and policy that flow from placing sufficient emphasis on the gestational role. The overarching thesis of this paper is that gestational surrogacy is ethically permissible when these fundamental requirements are adhered to, and that surrogacy law should proceed on this basis.</p>","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":"38 8","pages":"674-683"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bioe.13302","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bioe.13302","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Gestational surrogacy is ethically complex, generating very different responses in law and policy worldwide. This paper argues that contemporary surrogacy law and policy, across many jurisdictions, fail to give sufficient attention to the significance of the relationship between the child and the gestational surrogate. This failure risks repeating the mistakes of historical, discredited approaches to adoption and donor-assisted conception. This paper argues that proper recognition of the significance of gestation must be an organising principle in surrogacy law and policy. The paper begins by pointing to examples of surrogacy law and practice where the role of the gestator is unacceptably minimised, most notably the framing of the surrogate as a mere ‘carrier’. It goes on to examine the nature of gestation, including consideration of contemporary scholarship on the metaphysics of pregnancy and emerging work in epigenetics, and argues that current evidence supports the view that the gestational relationship must be taken more seriously than it currently is. The paper then draws analogies with parenthood in donor-assisted conception and adoption to argue that approaches to parental status in novel family formations that fail to promote transparency and seek to deny the truth of familial relationships are doomed to fail. The paper concludes by suggesting some implications for law and policy that flow from placing sufficient emphasis on the gestational role. The overarching thesis of this paper is that gestational surrogacy is ethically permissible when these fundamental requirements are adhered to, and that surrogacy law should proceed on this basis.

代孕与妊娠的意义:对法律和政策的影响。
妊娠代孕在伦理上十分复杂,在世界各地的法律和政策中产生了截然不同的反应。本文认为,许多司法管辖区的当代代孕法律和政策都未能充分重视孩子与妊娠代孕者之间关系的重要性。这种失误有可能重蹈历史上在收养和捐献者辅助受孕方面的覆辙。本文认为,适当承认妊娠的重要性必须成为代孕法律和政策的组织原则。本文首先指出了代孕法律和实践中将妊娠者的作用最小化到令人无法接受的程度的例子,最明显的例子是将代孕者仅仅定义为 "载体"。论文接着探讨了妊娠的性质,包括当代关于妊娠形而上学的学术研究和新出现的表观遗传学研究,并认为目前的证据支持这样一种观点,即妊娠关系必须得到比现在更认真的对待。然后,论文通过与捐赠辅助受孕和收养中的父母身份进行类比,论证了在新的家庭形式中,如果不能提高透明度并试图否认家庭关系的真实性,那么有关父母身份的方法注定会失败。最后,本文提出了充分强调妊娠角色对法律和政策的一些影响。本文的主要论点是,在遵守这些基本要求的情况下,妊娠代孕在伦理上是允许的,代孕法应在此基础上进行。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Bioethics
Bioethics 医学-医学:伦理
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
9.10%
发文量
127
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: As medical technology continues to develop, the subject of bioethics has an ever increasing practical relevance for all those working in philosophy, medicine, law, sociology, public policy, education and related fields. Bioethics provides a forum for well-argued articles on the ethical questions raised by current issues such as: international collaborative clinical research in developing countries; public health; infectious disease; AIDS; managed care; genomics and stem cell research. These questions are considered in relation to concrete ethical, legal and policy problems, or in terms of the fundamental concepts, principles and theories used in discussions of such problems. Bioethics also features regular Background Briefings on important current debates in the field. These feature articles provide excellent material for bioethics scholars, teachers and students alike.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信