How surrogacy ban impacts medical professionals?

Medically-assisted procreation (MAP) is a growing trend that is deeply ingrained in contemporary society.

There is a wide variety of support for natural fertilization that can be provided for infertile couples by a variety of methods. Nonetheless, as per pundits, such procedures, including surrogacy, can bring about the commodification of human existence and the double-dealing of ladies, which makes surrogacy, especially the business kind, so unsettled from a bioethical point of view.

Medical professionals and surrogacy ban

The process by which a woman, known as a carrier or surrogate mother, gives birth on behalf of a commissioning couple or individual, known as the “intended parents,” is referred to as “surrogate motherhood.” Techniques for heterologous fertilization are used in this practice.

Traditional and gestational forms of surrogacy exist: In the first scenario, the surrogate mother uses her own egg and is artificially inseminated with the donor or intended father’s sperm; Instead, gestational surrogacy uses an embryo that is implanted into the womb of the surrogate through an in vitro fertilization (IVF) procedure. There is no genetic link between the surrogate and the child born through gestational surrogacy. The intended (or commissioning) parents can be heterosexual, homosexual, or even single.

The traditional approach to the issue of infertility is surrogacy. Although it has been around for a long time, since the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) issued its first statement on the subject in 1983, it has become more prevalent.

There are those who contend that the risks outweigh the benefits of surrogacy and that it should be permitted because it is beneficial to all parties and would restrict the autonomy of sterile couples.

There are pathological conditions that prevent women from becoming pregnant or carrying a pregnancy to term, which should be taken into consideration. In situations like these, the location of the uterus may be the only option. Congenital uterine agenesis (Mayer–Rokitansky–Küster–Hauser syndrome), major congenital uterine malformation (hypoplastic uterus and bicornuate/unicorn uterus), the results of hysterectomy performed for a variety of reasons, or an acquired condition (intrauterine adhesions and leiomyoma) causing uterine dysfunction with unsuccessful attempts at fertility treatment may all be associated with surrogacy Surrogacy may be a viable alternative to uterus transplantation in these situations, particularly in the event that the latter is unsuccessful.

Patients with serious ailments, for example, heart or kidney infections that contraindicate pregnancy, could likewise profit from surrogacy; The “social” mother is also able to avoid the dangers of pregnancy with this method, such as preeclampsia, amniotic embolism, especially in elderly mothers, infections during childbirth, and so on. In cases of repeated implantation failures during assisted fertilization, it can also be considered a last resort.

However, there are still a lot of unanswered questions about surrogacy, and there are significant disagreements among members of the medical community, the medical ethics community, state legislatures, the courts, and the general public.

When faced with the decision of surrogacy, courts typically favor a number of factors, many of which are in opposition to one another: the child’s best interests, the rights of the gestational mother, the genetic connection between the child and the biological parents, and the goals of the surrogacy couple. The ethical and legal communities do not agree on which of these aspects should take precedence.

By examining the current legislative situation in relation to surrogacy, the authors sought to shed light on the legal vacuum that currently exists even in many advanced democracies and frequently results in uneven decision-making standards and procedures. It is argued that this uncertainty poses a threat to the rights of both prospective parents and children.

Due to the fact that surrogacy is not specifically regulated by targeted legislation in many nations, the role of the courts is unquestionably crucial, particularly in protecting children born overseas whose intended parents seek to legally register them as their own. In this regard, the authors looked at the opinions and decisions of supranational courts and mapped the development of judicial approaches in Italy. Children and families alike do have rights that must be upheld, and the current ambiguity in most countries risks causing prejudice.

In this sense, it is essential to prioritize the rights of surrogate babies, whose best interests may be overlooked, in order to better protect the rights of other parties.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *