Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

LIVE: Thursday 2nd May 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

Quality sleep is essential for health. But what happens to our brains when sleep patterns are disturbed? Join our experts to explore the interplay between sleep disruption and neurological diseases, and the questions that you need to be asking your patients to help you prevent the harmful effects of sleep deprivation.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics
Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 2/2020

01-02-2020 | Commentary

Thoughts on the ethics of gestational surrogacy: perspectives from religions, Western liberalism, and comparisons with adoption

Author: Raywat Deonandan

Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics | Issue 2/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

In gestational surrogacy, a woman incubates an embryo to which she is not genetically related. Genetic distance from both her and the commissioning parents is increased further when donor gametes are employed. Ethical implications vary depending on the extent to which the parents and surrogates share genetic material with the produced child.

Purpose

This paper seeks to address two primary questions: What do selected ethical frameworks tell us of (1) the relationship between genetic motherhood, gestational motherhood, social motherhood, and marital fidelity? And (2) the effects of gestational surrogacy and gamete donation on our understanding of lineage and heritability?

Methods

Current literature and thought on these questions were considered through the classical ethics lenses of religion, the adoption standard, and Western liberalism.

Results

A genetic link between the parents and the child serves to simplify the adoption process (if one is required) and supports a family’s desire to resemble as much as possible a traditional biological family, thus providing a minimum set of challenges to religious or conservative hesitations.

Conclusion

Inasmuch as gestational surrogacy, with or without donor gametes, is tolerated in a variety of ethical contexts; the basis of its acceptance may be the Western liberal celebration of contractual agreement.
Literature
1.
Cottingham J. Babies, Borders and big business. Reproduct Health Matters. 2017;25(49):17–20.
2.
Smerdon UR. Crossing bodies, crossing borders: international surrogacy between the United States and India. Cumberland Law Rev. 2008;39(1):15–85.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Chang CL. Surrogate motherhood. Taiwan Yi Xue Ren Wen Xue Kan. 2004;5(12):48–62.PubMed
7.
Deonandan R, Bente A. Assisted reproduction and cross-border maternal surrogacy regulations in selected nations. Br J Med Med Res. 2012;4(1):1–10.
8.
Wikinson S. The exploitation argument against commercial surrogacy. Bioethics. 2003;17(2):169–87.
9.
Kornegay RJ. Is Commercial surrogacy baby-selling? J Appl Philos. 1990;7(1):45–50.
10.
Parks JA, Murphy TF. So not mothers: responsibility for surrogate orphans. J Med Ethics. 2018;44(8):551–4.PubMed
11.
Goswami GK. The genetic truth of surrogate parentage. Med Leg J. 2015;83(4):188–93.PubMed
12.
13.
14.
15.
Berkman J. Ethical and religious directives for a Catholic embryo adoption agency: a thought experiment. From The Ethics of Embryo Adoption and the Catholic Tradition: Moral Arguments, Economic Reality and Social Analysis, edited by Brakman, S-V, and Weaver DF. 2007. (pp.251-273)
16.
17.
Brakman S-V, Weaver DF. Introductory chapter. From The Ethics of Embryo Adoption and the Catholic Tradition Moral Arguments, Economic Reality and Social Analysis, edited by Brakman, S-V, and Weaver DF. 2007 (pp1-2)
18.
19.
20.
Schenker JG. Assisted reproductive practice: religious perspectives. Reprod Biomed Online. 2005;10(3):310-9.PubMed
21.
22.
Lones ME. A Christian ethical perspective on surrogacy. Bioethics Faith Pract. 2016;2(1):5.
23.
Schenker JG. Jewish and Moslem aspects of in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1985;442(1):601–8.PubMed
24.
Serour GI. Ethical issues in human reproduction: Islamic perspectives. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2013;29(11):949–52.PubMed
25.
Muaygil RA. Reexamining the prohibition of gestational surrogacy in Sunni Islam. Dev World Bioeth. 2017;17(2):112–20.PubMed
26.
27.
Schenker JG. Human reproduction: Jewish perspectives. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2013;29(11):945–8.PubMed
28.
29.
30.
McQuisition HL. Clarifying “biological,” “natural,” and “adoptive” parents. Am J Public Health. 1996;86(11):1649.
31.
32.
Schenker JG. Religious views regarding gamete donation. In: Seibel MM, Crockin SL, editors. Family Building Through Egg and Sperm Donation. Boston: Jones and Bartlett; 1996. p. 238–50.
33.
34.
35.
Jacobovitz I. Jewish medical ethics: a comparative and historical study of the Jewish religious attitude to medicine and its practice. New York: Bloch Publishers; 1975.
36.
Tendler M. Infertility management: cure or Ill. Sh’ma. 1987;17(334):109–10.
37.
38.
39.
40.
Deonandan R. Recent trends in reproductive tourism and international surrogacy: ethical considerations and challenges for policy. Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2015;8:111–9.PubMedPubMedCentral
41.
Kumar TCA. Ethical aspects of assisted reproduction – an Indian viewpoint. Reprod BioMed Online. 2007;14(1):140–2.
42.
43.
44.
Kalra B, Baruah MP, Kalra S. The Mahabharata and reproductive endocrinology. Indian J Endocrinol Metab. 2016;20(3):404–7.PubMedPubMedCentral
45.
46.
Zoloth L, Henning AA. Bioethics and oncofertility: arguments and insights from religious traditions. Cancer Treat Res. 2010;156:261–78.PubMedPubMedCentral
47.
Numrich PD. The problem with sex according to Buddhism. Dialog J Theol. 2009;48(1):62–73.
48.
49.
Ying LY, Wu LH, Loke AY. The experience of Chinese couples undergoing in vitro fertilization treatment: perception of the treatment process and partner support. PLoS One. 2015;10(10):e0139691.PubMedPubMedCentral
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
United Kingdom High Court. Re an adoption application (surrogacy), 11 March 1987. Annu Rev Popul Law. 1987;14:–57.
59.
60.
61.
Leighton KL. Accepting adoption’s uncertainty: the limited ethics of pre-adoption genetic testing. Bioeth Inq. 2014;11:245–60.
62.
Harris-Short S. Making and breaking family life: adoption, the state, and human rights. J Law Soc. 2008;35(1):28–51.
63.
Fronek P. Current perspectives on the ethics of selling international surrogacy support services. Medicolegal Bioethics. 2018;8:11–20.
64.
65.
Watson JL. Agnates and outsiders: adoption in a Chinese lineage. Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. 10(2):293-306
66.
Deonandan R, Green S, van Beinum A. Ethical concerns for maternal surrogacy and reproductive tourism. J Med Ethics. 2012;38:742–5.PubMed
67.
68.
69.
Gould A. Origins of liberal dominance. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press; 1999.
70.
71.
Mitra S, Schicktanz S. Failed surrogate conceptions: social and ethical aspects of preconception disruptions during commercial surrogacy in India. Philos Ethics Hum Med. 2016;11:9.
72.
Sawer M. The ethical state: social liberalism and the critique of contract. Aust Hist Stud. 2000;31(114):67–90.
73.
74.
Atiyah PS. The liberal theory of contracts. In Essays on Contracts, by P.S. Atiyah. Oxford Scholarship, 1990.
75.
Rawls J. A Theory of Justice. Bellknap, 1971.
76.
Schaeffer D. Feminism and liberalism reconsidered: the case of Catharine MacKinnon. Am Polit Sci Rev. 2001;95(3):699–708.
77.
Okin SM. Feminism, the individual, and contract theory. Ethics. 1990;100(3):658–69.
78.
Imrie S, Jadva V. The long-term experiences of surrogates: relationships and contact with surrogacy families in genetic and gestational surrogacy arrangements. Reprod BioMed Online. 2014;29(4):424–35.PubMed
79.
Bell D. Defining marriage and legitimacy. Curr Anthropol. 38(2):237–53.
80.
Fellows ML. The law of legitimacy: an instrument of procreative power. Columbia J Gend Law. 1993;3(2):495–534.
81.
Van den Akker O. The importance of a genetic link in mothers commissioning a surrogate baby in the UK. Hum Reprod. 2000;15(8):1849–55.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Thoughts on the ethics of gestational surrogacy: perspectives from religions, Western liberalism, and comparisons with adoption
Author
Raywat Deonandan
Publication date
01-02-2020
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics / Issue 2/2020
Print ISSN: 1058-0468
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7330
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-019-01647-y

Other articles of this Issue 2/2020

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 2/2020 Go to the issue

Reproductive Physiology and Disease

Endometriosis, endocrine disrupters, and epigenetics: an investigation into the complex interplay in women with polybrominated biphenyl exposure and endometriosis

Technological Innovations

PFA is superior to glyoxal in preserving oocyte, embryo, and stem cell proteins evidenced by super-resolution microscopical surveys of epitopes

Gamete Biology

The potential impact of tumor suppressor genes on human gametogenesis: a case-control study

Genetics

AZF deletions in Indian populations: original study and meta-analyses

Commentary

Quality of evidence matters: is it well reported and interpreted in infertility journals?

Correction

Correction to: Development of an efficient perfusion-based protocol for whole-organ decellularization of the ovine uterus as a human-sized model and in vivo application of the bioscaffolds