They were right: Same-sex marriage ‘changed everything.’ Well, by adding $3.7 billion to the economy.

gay marriage $3.7 billion

When same-sex marriage was legalized in the United States in 2015, a lot of conservatives and religious folks predicted it would be the end of the world.  Instead, it added $3.7 billion to the economy.

Same-sex marriage = $3.7 billion.  In fact, on the day same-sex marriage was made legal, searches on the popular website Bible Gateway for “end times” reached an all-time high. Evangelical preacher Pat Robertson claimed that after the decision we’d all be having relations with animals.gay marriage $3.7 billion

“Watch what happens, love affairs between men and animals are going to be absolutely permitted. Polygamy, without question, is going to be permitted. And it will be called a right,” Robertson said.

Well, the world didn’t end and no one has married their cat … yet. But what did happen was a surge of economic activity.

A new study by the The Williams Institute found that since same-sex marriage was legalized nationwide in the United States in 2015, LGBT weddings have boosted state and local economies by an estimated $3.8 billion.

“Marriage equality has changed the lives of same-sex couples and their families,” the study’s lead author Christy Mallory, said in a statement. “It has also provided a sizable benefit to business and state and local governments.”

Since Massachusetts first legalized gay marriage in 2004, more than half a million same-sex couples have married in America.

The economic impact of same-sex marriage has created more than 45,000 jobs and generated an additional $244 million in state and local taxes. Over $500 million in revenue has been generated by friends and family members traveling to and from same-sex weddings.

upworthy.com, by Tod Perry, May 29, 2020

Click here to read the entire article.

The post They were right: Same-sex marriage ‘changed everything.’ Well, by adding $3.7 billion to the economy. appeared first on Time For Families.


Source: Time for Families

New York State Legalizes Gestational Surrogacy

legal surrogacy in New York

 

New York State Legalizes Gestational Surrogacy

A protracted battle over the future of compensated gestational surrogacy in New York was resolved on April 2 when state lawmakers approved a budget that included legislation proposed by out gay Manhattan State Senator Brad Hoylman and Westchester Assemblymember Amy Paulin that legalizes gestational surrogacy once and for all.legal surrogacy in New York

Although New York was one of just a small handful of states that had yet to legalize the practice, which entails a surrogate carrying a baby who has no biological relation to her, the campaign to pass such legislation in the state was stymied last year by concerns that the surrogates who carry babies — as well as those women donating eggs — were not afforded sufficient protection and rights. The bill put forth by Paulin and Hoylman, who had his two daughters via surrogacy, cleared the upper chamber last year but never reached the Assembly floor following resistance from some women in the lower chamber, including out lesbian Assemblymember Deborah Glick, who told The New York Times that gestational surrogacy was “pregnancy for a fee, and I find that commodification of women troubling.”

Among other issues with last year’s bill, Glick and others expressed uneasinessabout the reality that most working people could not afford to spend tens of thousands of dollars to have children through gestational surrogacy. The bill primarily benefits wealthier individuals in addition to those who are looking for financial compensation by donating eggs or carrying babies.

Hoylman, however, told Gay City News in February that he hopes the push towards universal healthcare means that such reforms could eventually alleviate some of the healthcare costs of surrogacy.

The dispute over the future of surrogacy in the state continued into this year when Manhattan State Senator Liz Krueger and Assemblymember Didi Barrett of Dutchess and Columbia Counties introduced a separate surrogacy bill that would have included, among other provisions, a controversial eight-day window during which the surrogate and intended parents would share legal responsibility for the child — raising questions about whether the surrogate might refuse to turn the child over or seek some ongoing legal relationship with them — something Hoylman described in a February interview with Gay City News as a “non-starter.”

The eight-day window was not included in the final version of Hoylman and Paulin’s bill, but some elements of Krueger’s legislation appear to have been incorporated, such as additional protections for the surrogate and the egg donor. Hoylman and Paulin had long defended their own bill as boasting the “strongest protections in the nation for surrogates” by placing significant responsibility on the intended parents to pay for her healthcare, legal representation, and other costs tied to the pregnancy. Additional protections for egg donors were also included in this year’s bill.

By Matt Tracy, Gay City News, April 2, 2020

Click here to read the entire article.

The post New York State Legalizes Gestational Surrogacy appeared first on Time For Families.


Source: Time for Families

Legal Surrogacy in New York – Albany lawmakers pass landmark legislation

legal surrogacy in New York

Legal Surrogacy in New York – Albany lawmakers pass landmark legislation

Legal Surrogacy in New York – Albany lawmakers pass landmark legislation, The Child Parent Security Act.  In a marathon budget session, New York lawmakers passed The Child Parent Security Act, the most protective and forward-thinking surrogacy legislation in the country.  Only Michigan and Louisiana continue to ban gestational surrogacy for LGBT individuals and couples, Michigan banning gestational surrogacy for all Michiganders.legal surrogacy in New York

While legal surrogacy in New York seemed doomed after it failed to be brought to the floor for a vote last year in the Assembly after passage in the Senate and vocal support of the Governor, this year the Child Parent Security Act was tied to the budget.  This move forced lawmakers to affirmatively support or oppose the Bill, something that they had been reticent to do in June of 2019.  The bill becomes the law of New York on February 15, 2021.

The reality of legal surrogacy in New York is the product of a massive effort on the part of many organizations and individuals.  From Men Having Babies to The Women’s Bar of New York, several organizations have stepped up to the plate to make legal surrogacy in New York a reality.  Ron Poole-Dayan, Executive Director of Men Having Babies, the non-profit organization that has spearheaded educational and ethical surrogacy initiatives around the world, said, “The CPSA is the most comprehensive, thoughtful and ethical surrogacy legislation ever drafted. It is particularly important now in the midst of a health crisis, to pass this legislation that provides New Yorkers an ethical and affordable path to the realizing their parenthood dreams.  This is landmark legislation and we are proud of our lawmakers for taking this important step to help LGBT families prosper.”  “It’s an amazing day and it’s nice to be able to celebrate in these dark times.  The bill only passed when the issue grew into a moment and everyone played an important role,” stated Denise Seidleman, the New York attorney who was instrumental in drafting the legislation.

“We are overjoyed for New York families, as they finally are able to access gestational surrogacy if they need it to build their family.  This has been a marathon, with many teammates along the way.  This kind of win takes people raising their voice and advocating – we thank everyone who did just that.  A huge thanks to RESOLVE advocate Risa Levine, and the Protecting Modern Families Coalition that got this over the finish line. We are honored to work alongside an incredible coalition,” said Barb Collura, CEO and President of RESOLVE, The National Fertility Association.

“This is a game changer!  It will bring so much opportunity for our local IP’s, as well as our local clinics and potential surrogates.  Being an east coast based agency, Circle has a lot of intended parents who live in NY and the entire tri-state area,” said Jen Rachman, the New York Representative for Circle Surrogacy, a Boston based surrogacy agency.

How This Law is Unique

legal surrogacy in New YorkThis legislation is unique in several ways.  First, it contains a Surrogates Bill of Rights, which is the first of its kind in the country.  It provides specifically for independent counsel, health and welfare decision making authority during the pregnancy and full medical and legal informed consent of all New York women acting as surrogate mothers for intended parents.  It also provides for psychological counseling, life insurance and the ability of the surrogate to terminate the agreement prior to embryo transfer. 

The Child Parent Security Act also creates two formal, but voluntary, registries, one for egg donors and the other for surrogate mothers, which tracks information on the number of times someone has served as a donor or surrogate, their health information and any other information that the Health Commissioner deems appropriate.  The legislation also allows for consultation with The American Society of Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) to develop the best medical screening guidelines for potential surrogates.

Establishment of Parentage

The Child Parent Security Act, while creating legal surrogacy in New York, also provides for the establishment of parentage for intended parents of surrogacy, as well as lesbian couples who use a known sperm donor to assist them in having their families.  The process is known as a Pre-Birth Order and allows a court to issue a court order which terminates the rights of the surrogate and her spouse, or the known sperm donor, and affirms the legal parentage of the intended parents in a fully recognized court order which goes into effect at the moment of birth of the child.  The law also officially recognizes parentage orders from other states, ensuring that NY parents who have previously had children with surrogates in other states and obtained birth orders in those states to establish parentage, can rest assured that the other state’s order will be recognized by statute in New York.

Before this law’s passage, intended parents who resided in New York had few options to establish parentage.  Second or step parent adoption, a time consuming and somewhat invasive process, was the only way of establishing parental rights in New York.

The Ethics of The Child Parent Security Act

Regulation is the key to achieving ethical surrogacy. The Child Parent Security Act provides for more than just baseline protections and suggested protocols for an ethical journey.  The Surrogates Bill of Rights is a huge step toward ensuring that the process is balanced and that the woman acting as a surrogate mother has agency and support throughout the process.  The law also provides for the security of parentage, which assures that all parties are working toward a single goal of creating a family for the intended parent or parents. 

New York Adapts to Modern Family Creation

New York, in the midst of a global pandemic, and under the powerful and consistent guidance of Governor Andrew Cuomo, has brought its family law into the 21st century.  Many, myself included, could not comprehend how such a progressive and diverse state could lag so far behind the rest of the country in its recognition and support of assisted reproduction.  I was fortunate to sit on the Governor’s commission for the passage of The Child Parent Security Act and am a constituent of Assemblyperson Deborah Glick, who had opposed the legislation until last June.  To her credit, she met with me to discuss the legislation and I was able to correspond with her staff about surrogacy on several occasions. 

The passage of this legislation was truly a collaborative effort and the hard work of every person who worked on the coalition to pass the Child Parent Security act deserves credit for making legal surrogacy in New York a reality.  Whether a cancer survivor, an infertile couple or an LGBT New Yorker, this law now allows for the option of remaining in New York to create a family.  Finally, I want to thank Governor Cuomo for having the confidence in this law’s wisdom to add it to the budget bill.  This strategy was instrumental in its passing and the Governor deserves a great deal of credit and gratitude.  Legal surrogacy in New York!  I have waited to celebrate this moment for years!

April 2, 2020 by Anthony M. Brown, Esq.

The post Legal Surrogacy in New York – Albany lawmakers pass landmark legislation appeared first on Time For Families.


Source: Time for Families

The Latest Study on Regulation of Compensated Gestational Surrogacy in New York

compensated gestational surrogacy

The Latest Study on Regulation of Compensated Gestational Surrogacy in New York

The Latest Study on Regulation of Compensated Gestational Surrogacy in New York underscores the need to pass this legislation and shows that it would provide the most comprehensive protections for gestational carriers in the US.compensated gestational surrogacy

This report on the regulation of compensated gestational surrogacy in New York, issued in March 2020 to the New York State Legislature by Weill Cornell Medicine and the Cornell Law School is one of the most comprehensive reports of its kind and leads the reader to now other conclusion but that New York’s pending legislation, The Child Parent Security Act, would be the most protective of gestational carriers, or surrogate mothers, of any piece of legislation in existence in the US.  Surrogacy legislation  can be ethical and comprehensive.

To quote from the article, “The trend among state legislatures in the United States is to permit rather than prohibit compensated gestational surrogacy. Since 2000, fifteen states and the District of Columbia have acted to explicitly permit compensated gestational surrogacy. On the other hand, only four states have taken a prohibitive approach since 2000 and two of those states permit uncompensated gestational surrogacy.”

“In forty-four states there is no prohibition on surrogacy by statute or there is explicit or implicit permission. Even in the six states that have statutes that appear to prohibit surrogacy, courts have granted pre-birth orders to intended parents and have issued other pro-surrogacy decisions. Consequently, surrogacy in varying ways, including by approving pre-birth orders.”

“In sum, the health and medical literature does not weigh in favor of continuing to prohibit gestational surrogacy in New York. There are generally no disparate health outcomes for gestational carriers as compared to non-gestational carriers using assisted reproductive technology (ART) nor are their disparate health impacts on children. Additionally, there are no disparate psychological impacts on gestational carriers as compared to women who have had spontaneously conceived pregnancies. States across the country are moving to legalize and regulate gestational surrogacy in the last decade.”

March 20, 2020 by Cornell Weill Medical Center and Law School 

Click here to read the entire article.

The post The Latest Study on Regulation of Compensated Gestational Surrogacy in New York appeared first on Time For Families.


Source: Time for Families

South Dakota Senate panel narrowly defeats commercial surrogacy ban

South Dakota surrogacy ban

A South Dakota Senate committee on Wednesday narrowly rejected a measure that would have criminalized commercial surrogate pregnancy agents, making it unlikely for such a ban to win approval this year.

The South Dakota Senate Health and Human Services voted down the surrogacy ban bill 4-3 after a debate pitting some families who have used surrogates for pregnancy against critics who argue the practice exploits and endangers women and babies.South Dakota

Sen. Arthur Rusch, a Republican from Vermillion, cast the deciding vote against the legislation after initially moving to approve it and send it on to the full Senate. He called it “one of the most difficult decisions that I’ve made.”

The House had previously passed the bill, which deals with the practice of having a woman being impregnated with an embryo from another couple.

The proposal would have made acting as a surrogacy agent a misdemeanor punishable by up to a year in jail. It would have made South Dakota one of a handful of states to criminalize the practice. Lawmakers said they would be more open to regulating surrogacy rather than passing an outright ban.

Rep. Jon Hansen, the Dell Rapids Republican who introduced the bill, argued that commercial surrogacy makes women and babies vulnerable to commercial contracts.

“Human beings are not property to be bartered for,” he said.

During testimony Wednesday, supporters of the commercial ban pointed to situations in other states where commercial surrogates have had to go to court over disputes arising from the contracts. They argued that commercial surrogacy targets women who are poor and from vulnerable communities.

Jennifer Lahl, an activist against commercial surrogacy from California, said surrogate pregnancies have higher health risks than normal pregnancies and pointed to the deaths of several women who died from complications during a surrogate pregnancy.

The bill also had the support of anti-abortion groups, an influential force in the conservative state. Many surrogacy contracts address “fetal reduction,” in which one fetus may be aborted if a woman has twins or triplets. They argued that the contracts could be used to pressure women into getting an abortion.

Women from a group of families that have had children through surrogacy opposed the bill. They have been frequent visitors to the Capitol as the bill progressed through the Legislature, making their case to lawmakers.

They argued that the bill is based on worst-case scenarios, mostly from other states, and that the commercial contracts protect both the women acting as surrogates and the intended parents.

TheHour.com by Stephen Groves, February 26, 2020

Click here to read the entire article.

The post South Dakota Senate panel narrowly defeats commercial surrogacy ban appeared first on Time For Families.


Source: Time for Families

War Of The New York Surrogacy Bills Erupts

New York surrogacy

New York is lagging behind the rest of the country as one of the few remaining jurisdictions in the United States that does not permit compensated surrogacy.

Things just took a bizarre turn in the New York legislature when it comes to surrogacy. Last week, New York State Senator Liz Kruger (SD-28) introduced S7717. That’s a new bill to legalize compensated surrogacy in New York. Great, right? Well, there’s already a different bill that’s both much further along and also, like, way better than S7717. So what gives?New York surrogacy

As astute readers know, New York is lagging behind the rest of the country as one of the few remaining jurisdictions in the United States that does not permit compensated surrogacy. And while a handful of jurisdictions once also had this legal prohibition, most have reversed course. Fortunately, New York has been looking poised to do the same with the smart, well-drafted Child-Parent Security Act. However, that’s a separate bill — and quite different from S7717.

What’s going on?

Last year, the Child Parent Security Act (CPSA) came very close to passing. But then it didn’t. Instead, it fell victim to the legislative sausage-making process.

After passing the Senate, and having the full and vocal support of Gov. Andrew Cuomo, it was never brought up for a vote on the Assembly floor. So eventually, it died at the end of the 2019 legislative session. It didn’t help that at the last minute, noted feminist icon Gloria Steinem, published an incendiary op-ed against surrogacy.

 

gestational carriersSo incendiary that some people had to do some real soul searching as to whether we were still, in fact, feminists, while Steinem argued that permitting compensated surrogacy was exploitative of women. It was sort of surreal to hear Steinem on the side of having the government tell women what they can and can’t do with their bodies.

However, after all that, this should be the CPSA’s year. Except now comes along S7717, which looks like an attempt to muddy the waters.

The CPSA takes the approach of following the generally accepted standards and best practices concerning surrogacy arrangements, including those recommended by the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM); S7717, in contrast, takes a very different approach.

To give it some credit, it does seem to provide a clearer path for compensation for “genetic surrogacy” –- where the surrogate is genetically related to the child. However, most surrogacy in the United States is “gestational surrogacy” –- where the surrogate is not genetically related to the child. She is, instead, providing a way to help intended parents, who could not have a genetic child otherwise, bring their child to birth. Here especially, S7717 takes a new and strange direction.

  • Everyone Must Live In New York. S7717 requires all parties to be either a United States citizen or a legal permanent resident and to be residents of New York for the past 12 months. There is an exception if the parties are “immediate” family and there is no compensation. But that’s a very narrow band. Penalizing and disqualifying someone for living across state lines or being a second cousin versus an “immediate” family member is a harsh line to draw. 
  • Random Restrictive Medical Requirements. If that weren’t enough, S7717 requires that a woman wishing to be a surrogate under the proposed law *must* be under 35 years old, and cannot have more than three births. It’s not exactly clear where these numbers came from though, since the ASRM guidelines provide that a woman can be a surrogate up to the age of 45 (ten more years!) and can have five prior births.
  • Impossible(?) Financial Requirements. The bill also requires what would often be impossible requirements. The intended parents would be required to have a life insurance policy in place for the surrogate for a minimum of $750,000, as well as a short-term and long-term disability policy. While maybe obtainable in some cases, and definitely good things to have in place in a perfect world, sometimes it can be very difficult to find such policies. For instance, some disability policies are not readily available to anyone if not provided by an employer, or require at least a year of being in place prior to eligibility for the benefits. So if no policy is available, it’s another no go.
  • Surrogate Can Keep The Child?! OK, the restrictions described above aren’t great. But probably way worse is the bill language providing that the surrogate is permitted to terminate the agreement at *any* time. And that specifically includes any time during the pregnancy. Even though the intended parents would be required to be financially responsible for the child at all times, a surrogate could decide to be a parent to the child.

Consistent with that madness, S7717 provides that hopeful intended parents can only be judicially recognized as the sole legal parents of the child after the surrogate submits a written declaration — no sooner than eight days following the birth of the child — stating that she is voluntarily consenting to disclaim and renounce her parental rights. But until such a waiver is submitted, the surrogate retains decision-making responsibility for the child (but still not financial responsibility). Whoa. That does not sound right.

AboveTheLaw.com by Ellen Trachman, February 19, 2020

Click here to read the entire article.

The post War Of The New York Surrogacy Bills Erupts appeared first on Time For Families.


Source: Time for Families

Commercial Surrogacy – a Complicated Legal Picture

finding a surrogate mother

Commercial Surrogacy’s Complicated Legal Picture

After trying to conceive through nine cycles of IVF, unsuccessfully, Alexis Cirel’s doctor suggested she and her husband take a different route: a gestational surrogate and commercial surrogacy.commercial surrogacy

“It was a hard decision and it took months of introspection,” says Cirel, an attorney in New York City. Ultimately, she agreed with her doctor. But surrogacy wasn’t legal in her home state, and she worried about the risk that her “biological child would not be my legal child” under state law.

New York is currently one of three states (along with Louisiana and Michigan) that don’t allow surrogacy contracts (though the remaining states vary greatly in their regulation of surrogacy) but may soon join the majority, with legislation on the table to make paid (aka commercial) surrogacy legal.

In the absence of a national policy, state legality issues date back to 1984, when a couple put an ad in the newspaper seeking a surrogate. Mary Beth Whitehead, of New Jersey, responded, and gave birth to Baby M. But everything soured when she wanted to keep the baby, which was conceived with her own egg. The New Jersey Supreme Court found that the payment to Whitehead was illegal, but ruled against her on the issue of custody: Baby M. went to the intended parents, though Whitehead received parental rights.

After the debacle, New York criminalized gestational surrogacy by fining parents and anyone who assists them, says Anthony Brown, New York-based founder of Time For Families Law, and the founding chairman of Men Having Babies, a nonprofit organization that educates gay men about surrogacy. The law was created to address traditional surrogacy (fertilizing the surrogate’s egg), but was extended to prohibit gestational surrogacy, where the child has no genetic relationship with the surrogate, rendering any contracts for “altruistic” surrogacy void and all commercial surrogacy contracts illegal.

Many people think it’s time to revisit the issue.

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo recently launched a campaign to legalize gestational surrogacy, after a 2019 effort failed, and he has support from families, attorneys, LGBTQ rights groups, and even celebrities (Bravo’s Andy Cohen was present for the campaign announcement).

“This antiquated law is repugnant to our values, and we must repeal it once and for all and enact the nation’s strongest protections for surrogates and parents choosing to take part in the surrogacy process,” Cuomo said in a statement.

The new legislation would create protections for surrogates so they could make their own health care decisions, including whether to terminate a pregnancy; would create legal protections for parents of children conceived by reproductive technologies such as artificial insemination and egg donation; and would eliminate barriers to second-parent adoption (a single visit to court to recognize legal parenthood while the child is in utero would suffice).

Many New Yorkers use surrogates but travel to other states to use them. Repealing the bill would simply make it easier and safer for everyone involved, Cirel says. She switched from her corporate law role to become a family law and matrimonial attorney after going through the surrogacy process, and she is a member of New York’s Love Makes a Family Council, created in conjunction with the proposed law.

Romper.com, February 19, 2020 by Danielle Braff

Click here to read the entire article.

The post Commercial Surrogacy – a Complicated Legal Picture appeared first on Time For Families.


Source: Time for Families

Fertility Fraud: The U.S. Is Experiencing An Explosion Of Legislation. And That’s A Good Thing

More and more cases of fertility fraud have been uncovered. And more and more lawsuits have been filed. However, each prosecution or lawsuit has faced an uphill battle.

Direct-to-consumer DNA kits have changed our reality. The wall of secrecy that was once behind conception and parenting — including adoptions, affairs, and the use of donor eggs, sperm, and embryos — is crumbling. One major facet of this reckoning with the truth has been the stark realization that many, many doctors were using their own sperm, a form of fertility fraud, to “treat” their unknowing patients.fertility fraud

Sometimes this practice was in place of “anonymous donor” sperm; sometimes, it was actually in place of the spouse or partner’s sperm. It’s pretty gross to think about. But even grosser is the complete lack of accountability for the doctors who must have known of the ethical and moral shortcomings of their actions.

The Justice System Has Been Failing Us

A doctor using his own sperm to impregnate a patient, without her knowledge or consent as to the source of the sperm, must be a crime, right? Or at least a pretty solid tort – fertility fraud? For many states, you guessed wrong. More and more cases of those doctors’ egregious practices have been uncovered. And more and more lawsuits have been filed. However, each prosecution or lawsuit has faced an uphill battle.

Take, for example, the case of Donald Cline, formerly a licensed medical doctor in Indiana. In one of the most notorious cases of fertility fraud in the United States, DNA tests have shown Cline to have used his sperm in unknowing patients, resulting in at least sixty children. When the betrayed patients and offspring sought legal remedies against Cline, they were unsuccessful. After all, the patients had consented to Cline inseminating them with sperm. Cline did plead guilty to two charges of obstruction of justice, after lying to officials about using his own sperm with patients. But that, to most victims, was not sufficient.

Time To Change The Law

Since current law has been failing the victims, many have sought, and are currently seeking, to change the law. State by state, if necessary. Last year, two successful bills were passed. One was in Indiana, unsurprisingly, as ground zero of the Cline fiasco. Another was in Texas, where Eve Wiley led the charge. (Listen to this podcast where Wiley and her believed-donor tell the twisting and fascinating tale of uncovering the truth of Wiley’s genetic history.) In Texas, without a civil cause of action due to the state’s recent tort reforms, and without a viable criminal cause of action to charge him, Wiley’s “doctor daddy” is still actively practicing medicine even today. That’s crazytown.

Now other states are following suit, and closing the legal loopholes that existed for doctors to take advantage of their patients in this most intimate of areas. And while I doubt that as many doctors are so casually using their own sperm these days, there are certainly modern horror stories involving assisted reproduction, including that of a staff member at a Utah clinic swapping out countless sperm samples with his own.

The states currently making progress in this area include my own home state of Colorado with HB20-1014 (Go, Representative Kerry Tipper!), Nebraska with LB 748, Ohio with HB 486, and Florida with SB 698. Other states, as well, appear poised to introduce their own fertility fraud legislation. While the proposed laws vary, they are consistent in their goals of ensuring or clarifying that this type of behavior by trusted medical professionals is not acceptable and not legal, and providing a path forward for justice.

AboveTheLaw.com, by Ellen Trachman, February 12, 2020

Click here to read the entire article.

The post Fertility Fraud: The U.S. Is Experiencing An Explosion Of Legislation. And That’s A Good Thing appeared first on Time For Families.


Source: Time for Families

Paying gestational carriers should be legal in all states

gestational carriers

Every year, hundreds of thousands of babies are born in the U.S. using assisted reproductive technologies, including the use of gestational carriers, a multibillion-dollar industry that is controversial and largely unregulated.

One of the controversies involves the use of paid gestational carriers, women who agree to carry a fertilized embryo, created from another woman’s egg, give birth, and give the baby to its parents. This is different from tradition (or genetic) surrogates, who provide both their own eggs and their own wombs. Gestational surrogacy now constitutes 95% of all surrogacy in the U.S.gestational carriers

State laws about arrangements for gestational carriers vary widely and are in flux. This kind of surrogacy is currently allowed in 10 states; prohibited but with various caveats and additional legal proceedings in 30; practiced with potential legal obstacles and inconsistent outcomes in five; practiced but with legally unenforceable contracts in two and prohibited in three. Several of the 40 states with real or potential legal hurtles require that couples be married and heterosexual, or allow surrogates to choose at any point to keep the baby.

Commercial surrogacy first gained wide attention in the 1980s through the Baby M case. Elizabeth Stern had multiple sclerosis and feared that pregnancy would worsen it. Through a newspaper ad, she and her husband connected with Mary Beth Whitehead, who agreed to carry a fetus for them as a traditional surrogate, providing both an egg and a womb. But after giving birth, Whitehead decided to keep the child. A New Jersey court awarded the Sterns custody of Baby M, but banned all such future surrogacy contracts.

Since then, practices have changed and the use of gestational carriers has grown dramatically. In many states, however, prospective parents need to travel to other states, like California, to avoid legal obstacles. Some seek surrogates in the developing world, which has its own set of problems.

Competing proposed bills in New York state highlight the conflicts involved in gestational surrogacy.

In June 2019, the New York state Senate voted to legalize gestational surrogacy. The pushback was swift and strong. Noted feminist Gloria Steinem argued strongly against the proposal, raising concerns that poorer women of color would disproportionately serve as gestational carriers. She also pointed out that the bill would require surrogates to be state residents for only 90 days, which could prompt human traffickers to bring women to New York to serve as surrogates. The State Assembly then rejected the proposal. Lawmakers are now considering at least two different revised versions of the bill — one from Gov. Andrew Cuomo and one from the bill’s original sponsor — that address these criticisms.

I believe the state should legalize gestational surrogacy, providing it includes protections to avoid the problems Steinem highlighted.

In the debates in New York, as well as those in other states, both sides have been arguing in the relative absence of data, without acknowledging this deficit. In fact, the limited data available so far do not suggest that women become gestational carriers because of financial distress, nor do the demographics reflect racial disparities.

StatNews.com, by Robert Klitzman, February 12, 2020

Click here to read the entire article.

The post Paying gestational carriers should be legal in all states appeared first on Time For Families.


Source: Time for Families

Virginia Senate approves bill to prevent surrogates from being forced to abort multiples

Virginia Senate

The Virginia Senate unanimously approved a bill Tuesday that would prevent surrogates from either being required to or prohibited from aborting multiples in their surrogacy contracts.

The bill passed through the House of Delegates in January, and the Virginia Senate proposed an amendment that will see it sent back to the House for final approval.new Va. surrogacy

With the amendment from the Virginia Senate, the bill reads: “Any contract provision requiring [or prohibiting] an abortion or selective reduction is against the public policy of the Commonwealth and is void and unenforceable.”

TheJurist.com, by Angela Mauroni, February 5, 2020

Click here to read the entire article.

The post Virginia Senate approves bill to prevent surrogates from being forced to abort multiples appeared first on Time For Families.


Source: Time for Families