Indian Express Editorial Summary
Editorial Topic : Pay the Bearer: Why Supreme Court Must Look into Compensation for Surrogates
GS-2 Mains Exam
Revision Notes
Judiciary’s Tryst with Surrogacy
- Early cases: Focused on stateless children born through transnational surrogacy.
- Other issues: Parenthood status, maternity leaves, eligibility of commissioning parents and surrogate women.
- Jayashree Wad vs Union of India (2016): Argued for prohibition on commercial surrogacy, leading to the Surrogacy Act.
Surrogacy Act
- Prohibition on commercial surrogacy: No payment, reward, benefit, fees, remuneration, or monetary incentive to surrogate mother.
- Altruistic surrogacy: Willing women aged 25-35 can act as surrogates once in their lifetime.
- Informed consent: Includes relinquishment of rights over the child and agreement to provide help to seekers of surrogacy.
Arguments Against Payment Model
- Concerns of exploitation: Hierarchy between intending couples and clinics versus poor or distressed women.
- Amounts to the sale of children.
Observations of Parliamentary Committee
- Pregnancy is not a one-minute job: Requires significant time, health, and family implications.
- Altruistic arrangement: Commissioning couples get a child, but surrogate mothers are expected to practice altruism without compensation.
- Recommended reasonable compensation: Commensurate with lost wages, medical screening, and psychological counseling.
Experiences So Far
- Transition to altruistic arrangement: Not smooth, with reports of rackets being busted.
- Struggles to find willing surrogates: Many intending parents have faced difficulties.
Conclusion
- Need for regulating fair compensation: Experiences show the need for a balanced approach.
- Supreme Court’s view: Whether the question of fairness in compensation is distinct from the logic behind prohibition remains to be seen.
हिन्दी