The Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill of 2016 not only bans commercial surrogacy, but on its radar are homosexual couples, people who are in live-in-relationships and single individuals who want to have children via surrogacy.
According to the draft law presented by Union Health Minister JP Nadda, only childless Indian heterosexual couples married for a minimum five years and with proven medical problems are eligible for surrogacy.
“Johar’s case has actually woken up the sleeping lion of surrogacy. This government is extremely against homosexuals or single individuals becoming parents through surrogacy and this bill is proof of it. There is bound to be a lot of rush for single individuals and homosexuals opting for surrogacy till this bill sees the light of the day,” said Karkhanis.
He also said that Mumbai was witnessing an unprecedented scenario where fertility clinics were outright rejecting singles and homosexuals desiring to become parents.
“This bill in particular does not target ‘commercialisation of surrogacy’ but ‘commercial surrogacy’. There is a difference between the two. There is nothing wrong with commercial surrogacy where a lady of her own will decides to become a surrogate and receives proper compensation for her services. This is certainly not against public policy as is being projected by the government. Commercialisation of surrogacy must be targeted and prevented. This is where surrogates are exploited and this needs regulation, but somehow the government is targeting the ‘commercial’ aspect of it,” said Dave.
“So long as the bill is debated and discussed, such cases can go on,” said Dave.
“There is still a scope to rethink the provisions of the law and make changes to it. What is perplexing is it is not clear what this bill is trying to achieve. Demand for procreation will never die and will only increase with time and there is a supply to cater to it from women who wish to be paid in return. Now, whenever there will be money involved, there is a scope for exploitation and the government must regulate such practices, but banning this concept for willing women and for unmarried couples does not make any sense,” said Ramasubhramanian.
“Now this entire thing is only possible because homosexuality has been prohibited under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. I have heard the government even mentioning in court at times that those possible amendments may be done to the Act at a later date in case homosexuality is decriminalized,” said Karkhanis.
But Ramasubhramanian also said that the concept that only the rich opt for surrogacy is certainly a “wrong notion”.
Comments
0 comment