Surrogate mothers should have no legal rights over a baby that she has given birth to if the egg used to conceive the baby was not her own

Wikipedia defines Surrogacy to be a preparation in which a woman carries and delivers a child for another couple or person. The surrogate may be the child’s genetic mother, or she may be genetically unrelated to the child. In a traditional surrogacy, the child may be conceived via home artificial fertilization using fresh or frozen sperm or impregnated via IUI, or ICI performed at a health clinic. Surrogacy arrangements are complex and involve medical, emotional, financial and legal issues. The relationship between the surrogate mother and commissioning parent(s) may break down, which may lead to disagreement on a number of issues. Consequently the surrogate mother should not have rights since it wasn’t her egg, therefore it wasn’t her baby and she firmly agreed knowing what will happen.

Although some people view surrogacy as baby-selling and look down on a woman who is a surrogate, in recent years surrogacy has become more of an accepted practice. Still the ethical question remains as to whether a woman who is being paid for her surrogacy is exploiting infertile couples and entering the contract for money. Live strong clarifies that sometimes a surrogate mother changes her mind and refuses to give up the child. However, in states where surrogacy is allowed, the biological mother usually does not win custody or visitation rights. In most cases, both the surrogate and the parents sign a contract to prevent this from happening.

A surrogacy arrangement is an arrangement between a woman (the birth mother) and another person or couple where the birth mother agrees to become pregnant with a child for the intended parents. After the child’s birth, the birth mother gives up the child permanently to the intended parents. With legal documents and written forms to back the parents of the child up in case the surrogate mother has a change of heart to wanting rights for the child.

Victorian assisted reproductive treatment authority explains that all surrogacy arrangements in Victoria must be approved by the patient review panel. All surrogacy arrangements must be altruistic, that is, the surrogate cannot be paid to act as a surrogate. However, the surrogate can be reimbursed for costs incurred by her as a direct consequence of entering into the surrogacy arrangement.


All parties must complete a criminal records check and a child protection order check prior to entering a surrogacy arrangement. The Australian high commission declares that Australians considering pursuing commercial surrogacy in India should be aware of new visa regulations which require medical visas for individuals coming to India for the purpose of commissioning surrogacy. The regulations place certain restrictions on eligibility for a medical visa.


The Australian Government is not able to advise intending parents on the application of Indian laws. We strongly recommend that confirmation of the latest requirements be sought from Indian authorities and that independent legal advice be obtained. With the excess amount of Australians flocking to India for surrogacy there are more strict regulations being put in place. For an Australian couple wanting surrogacy there are many factors to look at first of all costs, and regulations and rules, as well as the surrogate mothers change of heart what would be the point in spending countless amounts of time and money. To solve that in the agreement the surrogate mother should sign papers so what she has to do to make sure in the end of the pregnancy she has no right to change her mind.
There are many pros and cons to whether the surrogate mother should have visitation or legal rights over the child she gave birth to. You could say that the child might be curious as to who carried him/her for the nine month period. The child may then want to be able to interact with the surrogate mother because he or she should be able to have knowledge of who carried them for that period of time. But it’s in the best interest for the child to preferably have no contact with the birth mother as it could be difficult for either the surrogate mother or the child and that could take up serious implications.

In any situation of surrogacy the surrogate mother should not be able to have rights for the child she gave birth to. With the given examples and explanations given above there should be no reason to think that surrogate mothers should have privileges for the child they provided birth to. The surrogate mother happily agrees to everything in the beginning regarding she is to have nothing to do with the child once it is born she shouldn’t be able to change her mind coming to the end of the pregnancy she has no right to. Consequently if a surrogate mother changes her mind towards the end of the pregnancy she should not be allowed to forward an argument to have rights over the child hence it was not her egg so the child isn’t hers so she should have no rights or decisions over the baby once it is born.



Organ Donor-ship should continue to be a matter of personal choice in Australia

Organ donation is the donation of biological tissue or an organ of the human body, from a living or dead person to a living recipient in need of a transplantation. I believe that Organ Donation should continue to be a matter of personal choice in Australia because it’s your body and you should have the right to make that decision whether you donate an organ to someone else.  Do you want someone else deciding what happens to your body? Making the decision to be an organ donor can save the lives of ten people and also significantly improve the lives of dozens more. In Australia there are waiting lists for life saving organ transplants. The decision to have your organs removed should be up to you though, not the government or the hospital. Organ donation registry was established in 2000. Each year Australia has seen a rise in the amount of people choosing to donate organs over the past 12 years since the organ Donation registry began. In 2000 Australia had 190 donors and this meant that 650 recipients benefitted from these donors. In 2004 Australia had 218 donors and this meant that 783 recipients benefitted from these donors.  In 2012 Australia had 354 donors and this meant that 1052 recipients benefitted from these donors.  These statistics show that Australians are choosing to donate their organs and don’t need to be forced to make this decision. Each year the number of donors is increasing. Another reason why Organ donation should be a matter of personal choice is because of religious reasons. In many religions people believe that Organ and tissue donation is an act of neighborly love and charity by these denominations. They encourage all members to support donation as a way of helping others.  But in some other religions it is against their beliefs to donate any organs to others. In Australia if the law was changed so that it was compulsory for all families to donate the organs of a deceased family member this would be seen as illegal to some religions that ban organ donation. It is against a Gypsies religion to donate an organ because gypsies believe that for one year after a person has dies retraces its steps and all parts of the body must be intact because the soul maintains a physical shape. When a family member dies in an accident or of disease it is a very emotional time for the family and they should have the right to decide for themselves what happens to the family member’s body. It would be very distressing if the hospital just took the body away and told them that parts were going to be taken out of it. The other side to this argument is that there are not enough organ donors at the moment and many children and adults are dying while they wait for an organ donation. When someone dies there family is asked if they will allow the organs to be donated. It is important that families discuss this issue before these types of decisions need to be made. Organ Donation should be a matter of personal choice because it’s an individual’s body and they should have the right to accept or decline whether they want to be put on the list of being an organ donator and have body parts removed. We have seen that many people have legitimate religious and emotional reasons for not being on the organ donor list and we should respect these.  It is true that there are many people waiting on the donor list that may even die before they are able to get a new organ but that doesn’t mean that we should be forcing people and their families to do something that should be such a personal choice. Would you be happy having body parts removed against your will? 


Feedback Form