Raipur, Vouching the problems of surrogates requirement during infertility treatment, Government gave second thought to the amendments mentioned in the draft ART bill which was formulated in 2008, reviewed and redrafted in 2010 & 2014 but was never passed as law. Today Raipur Obstetrics and Gynecological Society in association with Indian Fertility Society CG Chapter under the able guidance of DR MANOJ CHELLANI & DR JYOTI JAISWAL organized a public forum in presence of Advocate Radhika Thapar Bahl,(Advocate& Advisor, Fertility Law Care, Delhi); Dr A.K. Chandrakar,Director, Medical Education; Mr R. Prasanna, IAS, Health Commissioner, CG; Advocate Mrs Priya Rao, Ass Prof Pt Ravishankar Shukla University; Mrs Abha Mishra, President Public Issue Social Foundation, Mrs Saroj Pandey, Chartered President& Dist PRO lions Club Shikhar; Mrs Priti Saraf, President Rotary Club and other prominent members from related field were present.
“Endorsing altruistic surrogacy will enforce emotional and social pressure on close female relatives without any compensation for immense emotional and bodily labour of gestation involved in surrogacy as well as loss of livelihood. A woman should not be expected to act as a surrogate and go through all the trial and tribulations of physical and emotional tolls of this arrangement free of remuneration and only out of compassion. A surrogate is indeed the most important stakeholder in this whole process who puts her life to risk and thus should be compensated for doing so. It has also been argued that one cannot guarantee that the altruistic surrogate who is a ‘close relative’ is not coerced into becoming a surrogate by just removing the commercial component of the practice. Not every member of a family has the ability to resist a demand that she be a surrogate for another family member. As such within family, surrogacy might become even more exploitative than compensated surrogacy,” explainsAdvocate Radhika, ThaparBahl, Advocate& Advisor, Fertility Law Care, Delhi.
It has also been discussed that permitting uncompensated surrogacy but prohibiting compensated surrogacy assumes the women’s inherent role to give birth but it denies women the capacity to earn wages for this work. By banning compensated surrogacy, there could be a black market in surrogacy services.
MR R Prasanna said “ He has heard both aspects of surrogacy and government and will make laws which safeguards interest of concern people.”
Dr. Jyoti Jaiswal, Secretary, Raipur OBGY Society said that there should be transparency in all cases between the couple and infertility practitioners, infertile couple & third party if involved in the matter. The whole surrogacy service could go underground and would lead to increased exploitation with no mechanism for protection of any of the parties involved in the surrogacy arrangement.”
Dr Manoj Chellani, President, Raipur OBGY society informed that “After rigorous discussion in Rajya Sabha, now commercial surrogacy is once again discussed to be allowed. He emphasized that all the ART clinic and surrogacy centers in Raipur Chhattisgarh are following the required protocol for surrogacy. Certainly there is no “racket” or “illegal’ happening here in Chhattisgarh.”
More important Facts around SURROGACY
India is called the ‘world capital of surrogacy’. Surrogacy generates 2 billion dollars annually in India. It is recognized fact that India had become a favorable destination for foreign couples who look for a cost effective treatment of infertility leading to a flourishing medical tourism due to cheap surrogacy services in the country.
The number of IVF/ART Clinics in the country, the Department of Health Research apprised the Committee that 1035 clinics are registered with ICMR. However, the actual number of such clinics is likely to be more. 468 IVF/ART Clinics are not registered with ICMR. As per unconfirmed reports, the number of surrogacy births in the country in the last three years is approximately 2000. The Department also submitted that only 11 complaints of surrogacy clinics have been reported so far
The Committee learnt from the surrogate mothers who appeared before the Committee that they engaged themselves in surrogacy out of economic necessity and saw surrogacy as a means of economically uplifting their families. Surprisingly, their other economic options were equally, if not more, exploitative and nowhere close to being as remunerative as surrogacy
The Committee, therefore, recommends that the word “altruistic” in clause 2 (b) of the Bill be replaced with the word “compensated” and appropriate modifications be incorporated in the said clause and other relevant clauses of the Bill with a view to harmonizing the Bill with the compensated surrogacy model.
