The Financial Reporting Council announces its plans for the ‘Big Four’ to ring-fence their audit practices
Over the last 12 months, I have watched with interest the fast changing developments in the worldwide surrogacy industry. Thailand has banned commercial surrogacy for foreigners. India has reportedly closed its doors to all but Indian citizens and non- resident Indians. The Guardian reported on 3 January 2016 that the Indian Government had sent notices to fertility clinics ordering them to stop all surrogate embryo transfers for all non- Indian passport holders, which is a devastating blow for those families waiting for their transfers to take place.
I have sympathy for families who have experienced challenges along their surrogacy journey and see first-hand the inadequacies of national and international laws. I feel frustrated that, despite calls for reform from surrogacy practitioners, we have made little progress either regulating the industry overall or reforming the law in England and Wales. On a positive note, we have seen some limited developments which help secure the future of surrogate children and their parents:
But there is still a way to go, as evidenced in the failings of the recent case Re Z (A Child: Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act: Parental Order)  EWFC 73, involving an application for a Parental Order by a single father. The child, Z, had been conceived with the applicant father's sperm and a third party egg using an unmarried surrogate mother in Illinois. The court was asked to make a parental order on the application of one person (the legislation states that an application must be made by two people). The declaratory judgment from the court in the US, relieving the surrogate mother of any legal rights or responsibilities for Z and establishing the father's sole parentage of Z, is not recognised in England. The Court declined to make a parental order because of the two applicants rule.
I understand the father is continuing his legal battle on Human Rights grounds, however it is ridiculous that his parentage is recognised in the US where the child was born, but not in his country of residence, England, where the child lives.
The tangled legal web in this case is sadly all too common, showing the inadequacies of our antiquated surrogacy laws. I hope that the next 12 months will bring rapid change in this area to smooth the surrogacy journey for all families concerned.
For further information on international surrogacy law, please see our services and FAQ pages on this subject and contact Connie Atkinson for issues relating to parental orders and Katie Newbury for immigration.
You may also be interested to read our previous blogs and articles about the complexities and developments in international surrogacy, which can be found HERE.
Skip to content Home About Us Insights Services Contact Accessibility