IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/lawfam/v38y2024i1pebae009a..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Surrogates’, intended parents’, and professionals’ perspectives on ways to improve access to surrogacy in Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Ezra Kneebone
  • Karin Hammarberg
  • Kiri Beilby

Abstract

While altruistic surrogacy arrangements are permitted in Australia, commercial ones are not. Regardless of this, most intended parents undertake commercial arrangements by bypassing domestic laws and engaging with foreign surrogates. Considering the welfare risks and ethical concerns associated with international surrogacy, developing a more accessible model of surrogacy in Australia has been proposed as a harm minimization approach. This study aims to describe how Australians who have navigated or facilitated surrogacy believe access to arrangements could be improved. Australian surrogates, intended parents, parents through surrogacy, and surrogacy professionals were interviewed, and interview transcripts were analysed thematically. The themes identified were ‘improve public awareness’, ‘develop policies to guide healthcare practitioners’, ‘establish agencies’, and ‘reform the law’. ‘Reform the law’ had four sub-themes: ‘harmonise laws across the states and territories’; ‘grant intended parents legal parenthood at birth’; ‘legalise commercial surrogacy and gamete donation’; and ‘fair surrogate compensation’. Findings indicate that improving access to surrogacy in Australia will require an overhaul of the legislative environment relating to surrogacy and gamete donation, policies to guide healthcare practitioners, and public awareness campaigns.

Suggested Citation

  • Ezra Kneebone & Karin Hammarberg & Kiri Beilby, 2024. "Surrogates’, intended parents’, and professionals’ perspectives on ways to improve access to surrogacy in Australia," International Journal of Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 38(1), pages 1-009..
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:lawfam:v:38:y:2024:i:1:p:ebae009a.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/lawfam/ebae009
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:lawfam:v:38:y:2024:i:1:p:ebae009a.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/lawfam .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.