UK Court of Appeals Rules that Baby Should Live With Surrogate
By NGA Law
This blog is published by a UK-based law firm that specializes in modern family law and has, reportedly, handled many of the UK’s leading cases on surrogacy, assisted reproduction, and LGBT families. It analyzes the rejection of an appeal by a same-sex couple for parental rights and physical custody of their surrogate-delivered child, currently living with the gestational mother in compliance with an earlier court order. It discusses the significance of the case for same-sex intended parents living in the UK and provides suggestions to address “common fears” related to perceptions that surrogacy arrangements frequently involve legal disputes and can result in gestational mothers being granted parental rights.
Another case – the fifth in the UK – recently tested the country’s legal framework around international commercial surrogacy. In November, a court ruled against a gestational mother’s attempt to keep the child, but complicated matters by granting her restricted visitation. While UK courts have historically decided parental disputes based on the best interests of the child, there are calls for more consistency when such disputes emerge. All eyes are on the Law Commission, which is expected to tackle the issue in the near future. Watch this space.


In this commentary, Dr. Geeta Nargund at CREATE Fertility, discusses the increase in ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) reported by fertility clinics in the United Kingdom.
Professor Michele Goodwin at the University of Minnesota and Judy Norsigian have described the “raw and debilitating physical, emotional and spiritual challenges created by deeply personal and life-altering procedures” experienced by some women seeking ART and support the need for additional regulation. In addition to the invasive processes involved in conception, the ethical quandary created by a recommendation for fetal reduction and the emotional toll on women and couples may be profound and is incompletely studied. Professor Goodwin asserts there is a “much needed public discourse that could also become the clarion call for regulation of a field of medicine that has thus far unsuccessfully regulated itself.”
