The last border of exploitation

A new form of trafficking which once again offends human dignity. A veritable expanding “industry” worldwide, which exploits poor and vulnerable women for reproductive purposes. It’s Surrogate Motherhood (Surrogacy) – Gestation pour autrui (Gpa) in French – whose victims aren’t only “the mothers hired by third parties”, but also the children born through this procedure. The phenomenon is increasing in eight US countries (especially in California, India, Thailand, (although a few days ago the Parliament approved a law that bans it to foreigners), Ukraine, Russia. It isn’t yet regulated at European or international level. For this reason, the Working Group on ethics in research and healthcare of the Commission of the Bishops’ Conferences of the European Community (COMECE) issued an opinion that examined surrogacy from the ethical perspective and reflects on its legal repercussions, advocating the need for rules at European and international level. The lengthy document was presented on February 23 in Brussels by Father Patrick Verspieren (Centre Sèvres), during the conference “Surrogacy and human dignity”, co-organized at the European Parliament by COMECE and by the EPP Working Group on Bioethics and Human Dignity, chaired by the MEP Miroslav Mikolasikb. Serious attack to human dignity. Surrogate motherhood is “proves to be a practice that is severely detrimental to human dignity”, affirm the COMECE experts in the document titled “Avis sur la gestation pour autrui. La question de sa regulation au niveau européen ou international”. The document points out that EU Member Countries deem unacceptable the “commodification” of the human body, but a common regulation is lacking. According to a compared study carried out by the European Parliament, the United Kingdom admits a “reasonable” compensation of 4-5thousand euro to the surrogate mother. Of the other Countries (the survey dates back to May 2013 and it precedes by two months Croatia’s adhesion), seven ban surrogacy completely, six partially forbid it, the others have no regulation on this regard. “Many judges have come up with legal arrangements that grant a child born from a commercial gestational surrogacy legal parentage with its ‘intended parents'”., the document goes on. However, according to COMECE; “the intrusion into the personal life of the surrogate mother, the denial of the intra-uterine bond between the pregnant woman and the child she is carrying, the exploitation of vulnerable women from poverty-stricken populations for the benefit of couples – or persons – who have substantial financial resources, without prejudice to any other sources of harm, gestational surrogacy proves to be a practice that is severely detrimental to human dignity” of which are victims surrogate mothers and the newborn, considered as “products”. Such “commodification of the child is in direct contradiction of the affirmation of human dignity, the keystone of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and violates “the prohibition on making the human body and its parts as such a source of financial gain'” (art.3). There is no “right to parenthood”, and the question of the legal status of children born in the framework of International Surrogacy Arrangements should be taken seriously. Often, upon the return to the Country of residence, especially if the practice is banned by national legislation, “aspiring parents” are not recognized as the legal parents of the child. A possible agreement. Several reports commissioned by the European Parliament demand the establishment of “common international regulations”, continues the COMECE document, and to establish, within the EU, a “mutual recognition of judgments” and public documents concerning the recognition of legal parenthood” and to cooperate in the drafting of an international convention. The reflection of The Hague Convention on International Private Law (April 2014) should also be duly considered. The debate “the reflection cannot end with the fait accompli of the ‘surrogate motherhood’ market and the associated development of ‘procreative tourism'”. EU Countries deem “unacceptable” the commodification of the body of the ‘surrogate mother’ and of the child, and of the child and, consequently, the commercial ‘traditional surrogacy'”. On this point, for COMECE “an agreement seems possible”. The search for common rules and comparable legal practices “could begin with the strict application” of this principle and thus “with the evaluation of the feasibility of refusing a transcription of birth certificates or a recognition of the legal decisions of the birth country in cases where ‘recompense’ is paid that goes beyond the mere reimbursement of expenses actually incurred by the ‘surrogate mother”. The crucial question, conclude the authors of the document, “is knowing if we intend to establish a society where children are manufactured as products” with human, legal and social consequences therein related.