Search

Canada has recently emerged as a hotspot in a burgeoning global surrogacy bio‐economy. On the grounds that any commercial trade in reproductive capabilities would result in the exploitation of marginalised women willing to sell their eggs and wombs, Canada's Assisted Human Reproduction Act (AHRA) bans commercial surrogacy, allowing only for altruistic arrangements. Drawing together analysis of the AHRA and related legal, regulatory, and policy documents, feminist political economic theory, and a growing body of critical social scientific scholarship on surrogacy, this paper troubles altruism as a means of insulating surrogacy from market‐based exploitation. It contributes to the extant literature an explicit focus on the law as a key site in the reproduction of the gendered division of labour. Acknowledging the serious concerns that dog commercial markets in reproductive biology, it argues that the legal constitution of gestational work as altruistic is part of a broader juridico‐economic apparatus that has systematically devalued reproductive labour under capitalism. Efforts to insulate surrogacy from the market by legally designating it as a gift freely given facilitate the ongoing appropriation of reproductive labour, which is assigned, once again, to the realm of non‐value. A feminist political‐economic critique of altruism, this paper does not forward an argument in favour of commercialisation. Rather, its aim is to upend the commercial/altruistic binary that has circumscribed so much of the thinking and legislating around surrogacy. This paper explores the role of the law in devaluing reproductive labour under capitalism. It does so via an examination of Canada's burgeoning surrogacy bio‐economy and the legislation – the Assisted Human Reproduction Act – designed to regulate it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study investigated the surrogates' birth experiences, their levels of emotional struggle at relinquishment, how often they thought about the surrogacy children, and the surrogate–parent relationship dynamics during pregnancy and post‐birth. Methods: Data were collected from 06/2016 to 02/2017 using an anonymous questionnaire. Participants were Canadian gestational surrogates who had completed the process with or without a successful live birth, and who were at various stages of an ongoing surrogacy. For this paper, only a subgroup of cases with a successful live birth was selected for analysis. Results: The data set included 131 births involving 90 surrogates who delivered 157 babies (105 singletons and 26 sets of twins). Their mean age at the time of surrogacy was 31.7 ± 5 years (range: 21‐47y). More than one‐third (37.4%) of the cases were for intended parents who were same‐sex male couples and single men. Surrogates assisting Canadian‐resident intended parents had an overall better birthing experience compared with those assisting nonresidents. There was none or very little struggle with the relinquishment of the baby in 96.9% of cases. Continued contact with parents after the births was reported in 93.0% of cases. Surrogates were significantly more likely to have frequent post‐birth contact with same‐sex and single fathers compared with heterosexual parents and single mothers (76.6% vs 54.3%). Conclusions: Same‐sex male couples and single men can develop a long‐lasting relationship with their surrogates even when no intended female partners are involved. The development of institutional practice guidelines in standardizing surrogacy birth practice is paramount in optimizing surrogates' care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]