Reluctance to reveal sexuality costs couple surrogacy

RELUCTANCE by one of the partners in a gay relationship to reveal his sexual orientation, and the fact that the couple didn’t live together, has all but cost them their wish to have a child through surrogate motherhood.

This was after the Pretoria High Court yesterday turned down the application by the couple to confirm a surrogate motherhood agreement.

Judge Ronel Tolmay found that the fact that one of the partners wanted to hide his sexual orientation could affect the unborn child in future.

“A lot of scenarios come to mind. I can see a little toddler excitedly running towards his father in public, shouting out ‘daddy’… would the father pretend not to be the parent? How will this impact on the child?” the judge asked.

The couple, referred to only by their initials to safeguard their identity, had applied to become parents in terms of a surrogacy agreement. They said they had been together for 10 years. Although they lived apart, as they need their own space, they spent most of the time together.

The pair had asked a woman who had twins of her own to carry their baby, which would have been conceived by using the gametes of CJD (the other partner) and the eggs of an unknown donor.

HN, a medical specialist, told the court he did not want his sexual orientation to become public as it could damage his practice.

In terms of the law, couples who wish to conceive a child by using a surrogate mother must first place all the facts before a court. This is to enable the court to establish whether it would be in the best interest of the (yet to be conceived) child to be raised in that household.

Among the issues that came to light was the existence of a family unit, common household and being comfortable with one’s sexuality, which the court said should be taken into account before giving the green light to surrogacy.

The judge commented that when she read the application, it did not reveal any controversial issues. It was only when she perused the attached report by the psychologist regarding the pair that red lights went on, and she asked for further submissions. She made it clear it was of no importance that they were homosexual, but the fact that HN wanted to hide it could have an effect on the unborn child.

HN had told the psychologist that “he was at first not really given a choice about becoming a parent, but that he was now totally on board”.

His was concerned about the reaction of his (conservative) patients and other medical practitioners to knowing he was gay, and that there was an 18-year age difference between him and his lover.

In further submissions and after sensing that the judge was hesitant to confirm the surrogacy agreement, the couple stated that they were considering moving in together.

Judge Tolmay remarked this was a “thinly concealed attempt” to try to convince her to confirm the agreement.

She said the pair clearly did not grasp the real concern of the court, which was that they did not live together and that HN wanted to be discreet about his sexuality.

How will this impact on the child?