Surrogacy Consultation UK


The UK government is currently holding a consultation on surrogacy, one of our 5 key issues. The consultation is heavily biased in favour of those wishing to exploit women and children in this way; the question of whether or not surrogacy is ethical is ignored, the apparent aim simply to ‘make surrogacy easier’. Please respond to voice your OBJECTion to surrogacy. You can respond via the government website, or email your answers to surrogacy@lawcommission.gov.uk.

The consultation has 118 questions but you are not required to answer them all. The deadline is 11th October 2019.

For those who have limited time, here are our suggested answers to some key questions (you can cut and paste them into your response):


Just got 5 minutes? Here are answers to 6 key questions!

Consultation Question 1:

Yes. All International surrogacy arrangements should continue to be automatically allocated to a Judge of the High Court. There is a history of International surrogacy abuse and exploitation and a high level of scrutiny should be maintained.

Consultation Question 7:

No. The Intended parents should not be documented as the legal parents at birth. This would reduce the birth mother to a vessel, a container, such knowledge of which would be detrimental to the mental health of the child, and against the healthy formation of their identity. This proposal weakens the surrogate's right to change her mind.

Consultation Question 9:

The prohibition on the use of anonymously donated gametes should apply to traditional surrogacy arrangements, otherwise this limits the right of the child to discover their genetic identity and may risk attraction to closely related persons.

Consultation Question 10:

The surrogate should have the right to object to the acquisition of legal status by the Intended Parents immediately after the birth and before the baby is handed over. This consultation takes no account of the natural link between birth mother and baby and assumes an immediate hand-over, whether the birth mother objects or not. The birth mother should have the right to change her mind.

Consultation Question 22:

The surrogacy business should be banned not made easier. There is no evidence in the proposed changes that the surrogacy business, which benefits Agencies, lawyers and those commissioning a surrogate (who is expected to carry a child as an altruistic act) should be made easier for those who profit. The evidence points to banning or severely restricting surrogacy practices as has been done in European countries such as Switzerland, France, Germany and Sweden and further afield in India and Thailand.

Consultation Question 31:

The views of independent surrogates are unlikely to be well represented, particularly overseas surrogates, mainly poor and uneducated and often exploited.


Got a little longer? Here is our 20 minute response!

Consultation Question 1:

Yes. All surrogacy arrangements should continue to be automatically allocated to a Judge of the High Court. There is a history of International surrogacy abuse and exploitation and a high level of scrutiny should be maintained.

Consultation Question 2:

All international surrogacy cases should require a legal parental order post-birth and be dealt with at the current level of the judiciary, so that parental order processes, involving qualified social work assessments can take place.

Consultation Question 5:

Yes. The parental order report should be released to the parties in the proceedings by default. The circumstances under which a court can decide otherwise should be clarified.

Consultation Question 7:

No. The Intended parents should not be documented as the legal parents at birth.

The aim of this proposal seems to be to reduce the time pressure on the courts to make it immediately possible to remove a baby from the birth mother.

This would reduce the birth mother to a vessel, a container, such knowledge of which would be detrimental to the mental health of the child, and against the healthy formation of their identity. This proposal weakens the surrogate's right to change her mind.

Consultation Question 9:

The prohibition on the use of anonymously donated gametes should apply to traditional surrogacy arrangements, otherwise this limits the right of the child to discover their genetic identity and may risk attraction to closely related persons.

Consultation Question 10:

The surrogate should have the right to object to the acquisition of legal status by the Intended Parents immediately after the birth and before the baby is handed over. This consultation takes no account of the natural link between birth mother and baby and assumes an immediate hand-over, whether the birth mother objects or not. The birth mother should have the right to change her mind.

Consultation Question 16:

I oppose the proposal that the commissioning parents should be the legal parents of a stillborn baby. Their disappointment will be diminished by the grief of the birth mother who already has a relationship with the child in her womb. What safeguards are planned in the new pathway should the woman surrogate die? What financial protections would there be for the woman's existing children and family?

Consultation Question 22:

The surrogacy business should be banned not made easier. There is no evidence in the proposed changes that the surrogacy business, which benefits Agencies, lawyers and those commissioning a surrogate (who is expected to carry a child as an altruistic act) should be made easier for those who profit. The evidence points to banning or severely restricting surrogacy practices as has been done in European countries such as Switzerland, France, Germany and Sweden and further afield in India and Thailand.

Consultation Question 24:

It is remarkable given the years of current surrogacy enablement in UK that those involved are not, never have been, subject to Adoption and Child Act (ACA) 2002.

Consultation Question 27:

I disagree with the provisional proposal that, where a child is born of a surrogacy arrangement, the Intended Parents should acquire parental responsibility on the birth of the baby. This pathway will take no account of, and fails to recognise, the bond which is formed between mother and baby during and after the gestational period and the right of a child to know the identity of their birth mother.

This pathway will favour the Intended Parents and the removes the right of the child to have a biologically accurate birth record.

Consultation Question 28:

The birth mother should retain parental responsibility for the child until the expiry of the period during which she can exercise her right to object.

Consultation Question 31:

The views of independent surrogates are unlikely to be well represented, particularly overseas surrogates, mainly poor and uneducated and often exploited.

Consultation Question 32:

Consultation is built on a pro-surrogacy bias. There is no hard evidence of the long term impact upon the child who is a surrogate or the mother who gave birth to them. The entitlement to ‘found a family’ has been reinterpreted to ‘found a family=the right to have a child by surrogacy'. The consultation seems to accept that breaching surrogate women’s human rights not to experience dehumanising practices is lost in the attempt to covertly enable baby buyers to ‘found a family’.

Consultation Question 39:

The prime concern of the consultation is the ‘commissioners’, so they can have ease of access to buying a baby, not the well being of the woman surrogate. The vast majority of woman surrogates come from poorer circumstances than the ‘commissioners’ and yet the law wants to describe that as ‘altruistic’ rather that what it actually is - commercial surrogacy which is not legal.

Consultation Question 50:

Children born of surrogacy arrangement, where there is or is not a genetic connection to the birth mother, should have access to all facts relating to their birth heritage and origins. A practice adoption agencies now recognise as key elements for children’s rights, security and healthy maturity.


SurrogacyHannah Harrison