Surrogacy, adoption laws can’t be on par: Yadav
NEWDELHI:SURROGACY laws cannot be on par with the rules governing adoption in the country, the head of the parliamentary panel constituted to examine the Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill said on Wednesday while citing “rights and duties” to explain why single men and same-sex couples should be kept out of the proposed law’s ambit.
The panel, which tabled its report in Rajya Sabha on Wednesday, has recommended that widows and divorced women be allowed to have children through surrogacy but single men and same-sex couples should be kept out of the bill’s purview.
Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) lawmaker Bhupender Yadav, who heads the panel, said the panel excluded single women from the list of people who they have said should be allowed to have children through surrogacy after “detailed discussion”. “The committee felt that raising a child requires both adhikar and kartavya [rights and duties]. Where there is an option of marriages available, then surrogacy should not be allowed. It is for those married couples, who want to have children but owing to various reasons cannot,” Yadav said.
He said it is for this reason that they have recommended that single men and same-sex partners should be kept out of the proposed law’s ambit. “Surrogacy rules cannot be on par with rules of adoption. Even in the case of adoption, a single man is not allowed to adopt a girl child.”
Same-sex couples have called the provision discriminatory. The committee has recommended that a child born through surrogacy should have all legal rights of a biological heir and that people of Indian origin, who opt for it in India, must follow laws of their respective countries.
The committee has recommended removal of the provision that mandated surrogates to be close relatives and has backed the Union health ministry’s suggestion seeking a ban on commercial surrogacy.
“The committee has recommended that expenses on account of diet, healthcare, and insurance be taken care of by the family seeking a child, but appropriate authority should be in place so there is no exploitation,” he said.
“While it is a good step to omit near relative clause for a surrogate, it doesn’t help to not include monetary compensation for the surrogate because not many women would be interested in carrying someone’s child without being paid for it...more thought should be put into improving the contours of the Bill,” says Dr Shivani Sachdev Gour, Delhibased IVF Specialist.