Criminalization Of Surrogacy Exploitation In Bangladesh
1. The Baby Manji Case (India, 2008)
Facts: This was one of the landmark surrogacy cases in India, involving a Japanese couple who went through a surrogacy arrangement in India. After the baby was born, the couple’s relationship soured, and the father refused to take custody of the child, leaving the surrogate mother in a difficult position.
Issue: The primary issue was the rights of the surrogate mother and whether she could legally be forced to give up the child. The case raised concerns about the exploitation of the surrogate mother, especially when contractual agreements are used to exploit the vulnerability of women.
Judgment: The Supreme Court of India ruled that the child should be allowed to be taken to Japan. However, the case highlighted the lack of proper legal protection for surrogate mothers in India, where exploitation risks are prevalent.
Significance: This case contributed to the legal debate over the need for a comprehensive surrogacy law in India, including provisions to protect the surrogate mother from exploitation, coercion, and trafficking.
2. The Baby Kamini Case (India, 2010)
Facts: In this case, a woman named Kamini (a surrogate mother) was allegedly exploited by a fertility clinic in Mumbai. She was promised a large sum for carrying the child of a couple, but she was not compensated as agreed. Additionally, her rights were not properly explained, and she faced coercion regarding the child’s medical care.
Issue: The case raised questions about fair compensation, informed consent, and the exploitation of economically disadvantaged women used as surrogates.
Judgment: The case was not formally prosecuted, but the incident led to public outcry and increased awareness about the need for proper regulation in India’s surrogacy industry. It called attention to the need for the Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill, 2016, which aims to regulate and protect the rights of surrogate mothers.
Significance: This case helped highlight systemic exploitation within the surrogacy industry in India, which led to the creation of stronger legal protections for surrogates under Indian law.
3. The Baby M Case (USA, 1988)
Facts: This case in the U.S. involved a surrogate mother (Mary Beth Whitehead) who, after giving birth to the child, decided she wanted to keep the baby. The baby had been conceived via artificial insemination for a couple who had entered into a surrogacy contract with Whitehead. However, after birth, she felt attached to the child and did not want to give it up.
Issue: The case highlighted the legal complexities surrounding surrogacy agreements, particularly the legal status of the surrogate mother’s parental rights. It also raised the issue of whether a contract can truly negate the emotional and psychological attachment a surrogate might feel to the child.
Judgment: The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that surrogacy contracts are unenforceable, especially when they conflict with the best interests of the child or the rights of the surrogate mother.
Significance: This case shaped the legal landscape of surrogacy in the U.S., emphasizing that contracts must be in the best interest of the surrogate mother and the child. It also highlighted the need for psychological screening and informed consent to avoid exploitation of women in surrogacy arrangements.
4. The Reproductive Health Act (Australia, 2008)
Facts: In Australia, the Reproductive Health Act was passed to regulate commercial surrogacy and prevent the exploitation of women. The law criminalized the act of brokering surrogacy arrangements for profit, particularly by commercial agencies, which had been a concern for women who were being pressured into surrogacy for financial reasons.
Issue: The Australian government sought to curb the practice of exploitation in commercial surrogacy, where financially desperate women were often coerced into surrogacy contracts under the promise of large sums of money.
Judgment: The Reproductive Health Act created strict regulations for surrogacy, including rules on compensation, counseling, and medical care for surrogates. It prohibited any form of commercial surrogacy, defining it as a criminal act if surrogacy arrangements were made for profit.
Significance: This case and the associated legislation set a legal precedent for ensuring the protection of surrogate mothers. It was a step towards combating exploitation in surrogacy arrangements, ensuring that women who agreed to become surrogates did so out of informed consent, not coercion.
5. The AID (Assisted Reproductive Technology) Regulation Cases (India, 2016)
Facts: In India, numerous cases involving exploitation in the surrogacy industry arose due to the lack of regulation, which led to the abuse of surrogate mothers. Many women, primarily from rural areas, were exploited by fertility clinics and brokers who took advantage of their economic vulnerability.
Issue: The cases centered on the lack of regulation and the exploitation of women in surrogacy arrangements. The women were often promised compensation, but faced poor medical care, inadequate psychological support, and were denied rights to the children they bore.
Judgment: In response to these cases, India’s Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill, 2016 was introduced, which sought to criminalize commercial surrogacy and regulate the industry more strictly. The Bill aimed to prohibit the exploitation of women and ensure that only altruistic surrogacy is allowed.
Significance: This Bill was a response to the exploitation of surrogate mothers and set a legal framework to criminalize exploitation, human trafficking, and coercion. It represented a shift towards stronger legal protections for surrogates and a more ethical approach to surrogacy practices in India.
Key Takeaways
Exploitation in surrogacy often involves coercion, poor compensation, and poor medical and psychological support for the surrogate mothers.
International cases highlight the risks of exploitation and the importance of establishing strong legal frameworks to regulate surrogacy and protect the rights of surrogates.
Countries like India, Australia, and the USA have passed laws or have had cases that address exploitation in surrogacy. These cases have led to reforms and regulations aimed at protecting surrogate mothers from commercial exploitation and ensuring ethical surrogacy practices.
Regulations like India’s Surrogacy Bill, 2016, and Australia’s Reproductive Health Act seek to criminalize exploitation and promote altruistic surrogacy, reducing commercial exploitation.
In conclusion, while there may not be specific Bangladeshi case law to explore at present, the legal landscape of surrogacy and its exploitation can be better understood by looking at developments in neighboring countries like India and Australia. Surrogacy laws in Bangladesh are still under development, and there is a growing need for legal protections to prevent the exploitation of vulnerable women involved in surrogacy arrangements.
RELATED Blog
comments