Hot Topic (1/2): Should surrogate mothers have rights to the children they carry?
New Jersey Judge Calls Surrogate Legal Mother of Twins
A New Jersey judge has ruled that a gestational surrogate who gave birth to twin girls is their legal mother, even though she is not genetically related to them.
The ruling gives the woman, who carried the babies in an arrangement with her brother and his male spouse, the right to seek primary custody of the children at a trial in the spring.
The case illustrates the legal complexities of gestational surrogacy, in which a woman carries unrelated embryos created in a petri dish. A gestational surrogate in Michigan recently obtained custody of twins she carried, but courts in several other states have upheld the rights of people who contracted with gestational surrogates.
Prof. Charles P. Kindregan, an expert in reproductive technology law who teaches at Suffolk University Law School in Boston, said the New Jersey ruling, which was made Dec. 23 but released to the parties in the case this week, could expand the rights of gestational surrogates if it stood.
“If it’s upheld, that suggests that gestational surrogacy is not as different from traditional surrogacy as we’ve always interpreted it to be,” Professor Kindregan said.
Mr. Kindregan has worked with an American Bar Association committee in an effort to standardize surrogacy laws across the country.
In the New Jersey case, the surrogate, Angelia G. Robinson, agreed to have the children in 2006 for her brother, Donald Robinson Hollingsworth, an accountant in Manhattan, and his spouse, Sean Hollingsworth. The embryos were created from anonymous donor eggs and fertilized with sperm from Sean Hollingsworth.
The girls were born in October 2006 and went to live with the Hollingsworths at their home in Jersey City. But in March 2007 Ms. Robinson filed a lawsuit seeking custody, alleging that she had been coerced into the arrangement.
Judge Francis B. Schultz of Superior Court, who ruled in the case in Hudson County, N.J., relied heavily on the precedent established by the New Jersey Supreme Court in 1988 in the case of Baby M. The surrogate in that case, Mary Beth Whitehead, carried her own genetic child for another couple after artificial insemination with the man’s sperm. After Ms. Whitehead decided that she wanted to keep the baby, the court ruled that her maternal rights could not be terminated against her will.
“The surrogacy contract,” the Baby M court found, “is based on principles that are directly contrary to the objectives of our laws. It guarantees the separation of a child from its mother; it looks to adoption regardless of suitability; it totally ignores the child; it takes the child from the mother regardless of her wishes and maternal fitness.”
Citing that passage, Judge Schultz wrote, “Would it really make any difference if the word ‘gestational’ was substituted for the word ‘surrogacy’ in the above quotation? I think not.”
Ms. Robinson, of Keansburg, N.J., issued a statement calling the decision “one more step in helping to insure stability and peace in the lives of our girls.”
Ms. Robinson was represented by Harold J. Cassidy, a Shrewsbury, N.J., lawyer who also represented Ms. Whitehead. In a statement, Mr. Cassidy applauded the decision and called surrogacy “an exploitation of women.”
Alan S. Modlinger, the lawyer for Sean and Donald Hollingsworth, said the case was of importance to gay men and lesbians because of their reliance on reproductive technology to have children.
Since 2007, the twins have shuttled back and forth between the Hollingsworths’ home and Ms. Robinson, who has three parenting days a week. A final decision on custody is expected after the trial this spring.
* * *
Do you agree with this ruling that "a gestational surrogate who gave birth to twin girls is their legal mother, even though she is not genetically related to them"?
Does surrogacy exploit women?
Who ought to get custody of the twins in this story?
Do you agree with this ruling that "a gestational surrogate who gave birth to twin girls is their legal mother, even though she is not genetically related to them"? NO
Does surrogacy exploit women? NO
Who ought to get custody of the twins in this story? The parents of the girls,,,the 2 men..
Do you agree with this
ruling that "a gestational surrogate who gave birth to twin girls is
their legal mother, even though she is not genetically related to
them"? Not at all
Does surrogacy exploit women?No
Who ought to get custody of the twins in this story? The brother and his spouse. I don't even understand why she has any parental rights at all. I'm guessing there was nothing written out prior to this arrangement taking place. How sad for those 2 girls to go through this.
Do you agree with this ruling that "a gestational surrogate who gave birth to twin girls is their legal mother, even though she is not genetically related to them"? - No, I don't believe this woman or others that agree to being a surrogate have legal rights to the children.
Does surrogacy exploit women? - In some situations yes I believe it can and may.
Who ought to get custody of the twins in this story? - the parents, which in my opinion is her brother and his spouse. I also think that even if the courts refuse to acknowledge their union the court should side with the biological parent and in this case that is her brother's husband.
Join us on
Current Events & Hot Topics
Group Mod
This......
Quoting tericared:
Do you agree with this ruling that "a gestational surrogate who gave birth to twin girls is their legal mother, even though she is not genetically related to them"? NO
Does surrogacy exploit women? NO
Who ought to get custody of the twins in this story? The parents of the girls,,,the 2 men..
The surrogate entered into a contract to carry the children for the couple. She knew what she was getting into. Too bad if she bonded with the children during the pregnancy or felt coerced. We cannot always get what we want, so she needs to be a grown up and suck it up.
As for surrogacy being exploitive to women, I can't agree with that because it is the surrogates decision to enter into the agreement. It isn't as if she gets impregnated on the sly.
But regardless of who is right or wrong, I think that one of them parties should be the bigger person and think about the children. One of them should voluntarily give up the fight so that the children have ONE home and one set of parents. This is a horrible situation. Someone will be hurt, I just hope that it isn't the twins.
The ruling should be against the surrogate. Knowing all that she had to do to become pregnant, she had ample opportunity to change her mind, so I do not believe that she was coerced.
It is too bad that what I imagine being a selfless gesture of love for the surrogate's brother, has turned into a riff in the family.
This is not quite on topic but adds a dimension to the exploitation question.
India Nurtures Business of Surrogate Motherhood
snippet from the article:
Quote:
Surrogacy is an area fraught with ethical and legal uncertainties. Critics argue that the ease with which relatively rich foreigners are able to “rent” the wombs of poor Indians creates the potential for exploitation. Although the government is actively promoting India as a medical tourism destination, what some see as an exchange of money for babies has made many here uncomfortable.
The Ministry of Women and Child Development said in February that it was weighing recommending legislation to govern surrogacy, but it is not imminent.
An article published in The Times of India in February questioned how such a law would be enforced: “In a country crippled by abject poverty,” it asked, “how will the government body guarantee that women will not agree to surrogacy just to be able to eat two square meals a day?”
The men should be the parents, they have the genetic claim. This gets a little weird. What if a baby was incubated entirely in a test tube or something? You wouldn't say the test tube is a parent, or the scientist that facilitated its growth. The surrogate, for all intents and purposes, is basically a human test tube.
"Seems to me, I'm exactly where I dreamt I would be. And the view from here is something to see..."
That is why surrogacy is such a contentious issue. Though many woman do this for family or children who are infertile I don't think you can ever discount the connection a woman will have to a baby growing inside of her. My heart breaks for couples who can't conceive a child but clearly this is not a matter for contracts. In a purely legal standing I believe the judge was wrong and will be overturned. The two men deserve to have the agreement upheld. As for surrogacy exploiting woman how? Nobody is forcing women to be surrogates they make a choice.
Quoting katy_kay:
Do you agree with this ruling that "a gestational surrogate who gave birth to twin girls is their legal mother, even though she is not genetically related to them"? - No, I don't believe this woman or others that agree to being a surrogate have legal rights to the children.
Does surrogacy exploit women? - In some situations yes I believe it can and may.
Who ought to get custody of the twins in this story? - the parents, which in my opinion is her brother and his spouse. I also think that even if the courts refuse to acknowledge their union the court should side with the biological parent and in this case that is her brother's husband.
i agree
Videos
Sometimes Single Parenting
The Kristen Chase Show
When your spouse is gone for days or even weeks at a time for work, how do you manage everything you need to do for your kids, your house and yourself? How do you prepare for your spouse's return so that the transition is as easy as possible for the whole family? Kristen is joined by Tracie Montgomery, working mother of two, to discuss some ideas to survive sometimes single parenting.
Watch More Videos from CafeMom Studios ››
Eight Year Old Girl Given "Catastrophe Award" By Teacher
- Cafe GroupAdmin
on Jan. 2, 2010 at 1:35 AM