India to propose a ban on commercial surrogacy, ending a lucrative business


NEW DELHI — India’s government has cleared the way for a measure that would ban all commercial surrogacy in the country, allowing only close family relatives to become surrogate mothers. The proposed measure is a blow to the thriving but unregulated rent-a-womb industry that many activists say is exploiting poor women.

Surrogacy Bill 2016 will be presented in Parliament for approval in the next session.

“This is a revolutionary step for women’s welfare,” said Sushma Swaraj, India’s foreign minister, who presided over a panel that examined the legal and ethical issues involved in commercial surrogacy and drafted the bill. “Many so-called childless couples were misusing the wombs of poor women. It was a matter of great worry because there were instances where a girl child or disabled child have been abandoned soon after birth.”


A victory for the women of India, especially those impoverished. If this is so, then good for them! :thumbsup:


Seems they could have found a middle ground between the current completely unregulated situation, and limiting surrogacy to only close family (which for some may not be an option).


Buy a sperm, buy an ovum, rent a womb. Freeze the spare embryos.
Time for this business to cease.


Great news. It’s an abomination. However I hope children are born and not murdered by population control scum and abortionist vermin


It seems to me that the essential element of surrogacy is what you refer to as “rent a womb.” After all, isn’t it possible for a married man and wife to use the husband’s sperm and the wife’s egg? What is interesting to me is that it is possible to select sperm to make it much more likely that the baby will be a girl. That could help to compensate for the imbalance in numbers of boys versus numbers of girls in places where there is both infanticide (i.e. killing after birth) and abortion targeted against baby girls.

I would expect that if you want a healthy baby to be born, then the woman in whose womb the baby is developing should be treated well. Of course, it is nevertheless possible for a woman whose womb is being rented to be mistreated or exploited. Why cannot such mistreatment or exploitation be addressed via some reforms? Why is it necessary to ban surrogacy altogether?

I do appreciate religiously motivated opposition to surrogacy itself, regardless of whether or not people are experiencing bad consequences that they had not anticipated. However, for religiously motivated opposition, it seems that time doesn’t enter into it. To a Hindu, the year 2016 isn’t a special time when cows should no longer be made into hamburgers. To a Hindu, cows are simply sacred, and there is no time when hamburgers are acceptable.


Well, the proposed measure as described in the OP, would still allow for close family relatives to be used as surrogates. Personally, I would oppose even that, since the process removes the conception and pregnancy from its natural occurrence in the marital embrace of husband and wife. The Catholic Church holds a similar position. The unitive and procreative should not be separated.

Even using close relatives as surrogates will not remove all problems. There have been cases where a surrogate mother has sued for custody of a child to whom she gave birth. She may consider herself the child’s mother because she is his birth mother. How will the child view the matter as he becomes older? He has two moms—a conception mom (although the actual conception probably took place in a petri dish) and a birth mom who carried him to term and gave birth to him. There is also the likelihood that the child has siblings who were lost during the IVF process or who remain frozen.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit