Posted:
Originally posted by: charminggenie
Amusing.
Foreigners were banned from surrogacy since 4 years now because of many infamous cases but prominently the Japanese couple who divorced and refused to have the baby. Or in 2012 when an Australian couple abandoned the baby because of the gender as they already had one of similar one. Best case in Germany,2008, where the country refused to grant citizenship to the child as it refused to acknowledge surrogacy as a means of parenthood. Germany- mark the country please.According to CSR (Centre for Social Risk) in 2014 reported , 88% surrogates in Delhi and 78% in Mumbai had no clue of their contracts , wages or what it meant. Interesting.Your fertility clinics don't run on ICMR guidelines as it is not legally binded resulted in rampant misuse making India , next to cambodia as a market. 2$billion industry - unregulated, not under legal purview.In 2013, the law against gay couple taking to surrogacy came because of decriminalising law and other regressive shit ( that is the problem) . So I find this hue and cry now so amusing.Single parents and live-in relationships are for now put under purview.A big positive that has come out is , earlier the kid born through this had to be adopted first . But now it is considered legally born to the parents. It's a big step , might not seem to few, but many developed countries doesn't have it.Against this is a draft , it will undergo zillion amendments by Parliament , Apex Court before it even comes out.Real challenge is to make this more inclusive , regulation and a swift reform for homosexuals, live-ins .
+1
Really glad to see stringent laws against this "rent a womb" scheme. Very very glad.
Cricket
Current Affairs
Anupamaa
57