Genesis Fertility Clinic Blog
searching: “gestational carrier”
October 16, 2011
Doing the wrong thing
Saturday’s Vancouver Sun ran a story about traditional surrogacy gone terribly wrong. (Traditional surrogacy means that the surrogate mother conceived using her own eggs and the intended father’s sperm by insemination – at home in this case.)
After reading it, I blurted “what were they thinking?” The case illustrates the necessity for the reproductive laws in Canada to be implemented.
Save to Delicious · Share to Facebook
December 18, 2009Building Babies - A Cautionary Tale
Surrogacy seems straightforward. A woman (called the intended mother) who cannot carry a pregnancy in her uterus has another woman carry the pregnancy for her. At the end of the pregnancy, the surrogate hands over the baby to the intended parents.
This is how the process works 99% of the time, and it works well. I coordinate the surrogacy program at Genesis, and it is wonderful to see people come together to help each other create their families. The surrogate is supremely generous, and the intended parents are immensely grateful.
Things can go wrong, however, as illustrated in a case reported in the New York Times this week. You can read the New York Times article here. There are five people involved in this complex case: the intended parents, the egg donor, the sperm donor and the surrogate (called a gestational carrier in this context). Briefly, a couple used donor eggs and donor sperm to create embryos. They put two embryos into a gestational carrier who carried the pregnancy and delivered twins. The carrier gave the twins to the intended parents, but a month later learned that the intended mother has schizophrenia. The carrier, fearing the twins will not be well cared for, goes to court and wins custody of the twins. It’s a messy, heart-wrenching story.
Why did things fall apart? In some jurisdictions, surrogacy contracts do not hold up in court. So, although the gestational carrier had a written agreement to give the children to the intended parents, the agreement wasn’t recognized by the courts (in Michigan).
Could this happen in BC? Perhaps, but we go to great lengths to prevent such a disaster. There have been no challenges to surrogacy law in BC to my knowledge. At Genesis, we try to protect all parties as best we can. We require psychological counseling and a report of the appropriateness of all parties before we will embarking on surrogacy (this was not done in the NY Times case). We also require a legal contract, and we interview all parties prior to commencing surrogacy care. This is an expensive and intensive process, but it aims to protect all parties from such problems as the NY Times case highlights.
It’s not easy to engage in surrogacy, but perhaps it shouldn’t be. Clinics should be thoughtful in who they help with surrogacy. After all, we have to protect not just our patients but also their potential children.
Dr. Beth Taylor, MD, FRCSC
Reproductive Endocrinology & Infertility