Revision of Persuasion paper
Professor Michael Cheng
Reading and Writing 
95101065 Bena
2011/04/26
Surrogate motherhood
Surrogate motherhood has been a controversial issue for a long time since artificial
reproductive technology developed in 1978 (Marwan M. Shaykh). Surrogate
motherhood is the concept that one helps a couple to have their own child. There are
two kinds of surrogate mothers, one type is the genetic mother, and the other is the
gestational mother (Guy Ringler). The Genetic mother model involves using her
embryo when being a surrogate mother, while the gestational mother only supplies her
womb. Originally, the measure was set to help those couples who are infertile and
have physical problems to bear their child. However, surrogacy is in fact utilized by
some illegal trafficker to make profits by trafficking children (Bangkok Post). In
Taiwan, surrogate motherhood was long prohibited, and it was not until 2008 had the
government began to discuss the possibility to enacting surrogacy laws. In Taiwan’s
Artificial Reproductive Act, surrogate motherhood can only be applied to those
couples who are infertile to give birth to their own child. This essay holds the view
that surrogate motherhood should only be limited to those infertile couples, and illegal
to any other usage of surrogacy.
Why should surrogacy be restricted? Is surrogacy allowed in all the countries
around the world? If not, then why did people debate about it? According to John A.
Roberson, “the United States, the United Kingdom, Belgium, and Israel have been
highly permissive toward ARTs (assisted reproductive technique); Germany, Italy,
Ireland, and Austria have been highly restrictive; Spain, France, and Canada occupy a
middle position.” (Roberson 3). There are many different positions on surrogacy as
mentioned here because it is a controversial ethical issue. This complex concern
includes several aspects as follows. Genetic surrogate motherhood would result in
losing complete kinship; that is, the child is only genetically related to one of the
original parents. Also, genetic surrogate motherhood involves the surrogate mothers’
genes, so we should consider if she could own part of the parental rights or not; even
in gestational surrogate motherhood, we should also consider whether surrogate
mothers are allowed to have custody of the child or not. In the well-known
Stern-Whitehead case, at first the New Jersey Superior Court took away all the
parental rights from the surrogate motherhood Mary Beth Whitehead, but after a year,
the New Jersey Court restored some parental rights of the Whitehead’s, including
visitation rights. The surrogate mothers are physically connected to the children, and
they are involved in 10 months of pregnancy, so naturally they will easily be linked to
the infants mentally. Is biological relation or physical relation defined as motherhood?
Is there any difference between pregnancy or not pregnancy? Surrogate motherhood is
exactly considered unnatural about these sentimental and biological aspects.
Therefore, since surrogate mothers are inevitably connected to the infants, surrogate
motherhood should be basically banned completely because of the unnatural relation
between surrogate mothers, the infants and the intended parents. However, based on
the principle of subfertility, or to say the “medical purposes”, I consider only infertile
couples are allowed to use surrogacy, which is what the present Taiwan ARTs Act has
allowed.
Second, to look into this issue more scientifically, surrogacy might violate the
biological rules of nature. Because of the rise of artificial reproductive technology,
human beings begin to create lives with their artificial technology, so there will very
likely be more and more people living on the earth in an unnatural way; in the
meantime, the biological balance of the environment will be destroyed. Also, genes
have their inner codes, which are innate and should not be changed by mankind at will.
However, as in surrogacy, physicians can design it; they take out the infertile couples’
sperm and ovum to help them “create” their own child, or implant the biological
father’s sperm to the surrogate mother’s ovum, no matter which form is it, the
artificial life “production” is itself hazardous and doubtful. To be more specific, ART
can be hazardous to both the surrogate mothers and the infants. Take the effects on
infants for example, the assisted reproduction skill might cause gene defects.
According to the medical research done by J. A. Land, these possible problems
include “Y‐chromosomal microdeletions, X‐chromosomal and autosomal aberrations
(i.e. Robertsonian translocations), syndromal disorders featuring infertility (i.e.
Kallmann’s syndrome) and ultrastructural sperm defects with a genetic basis.” (J. A.
Land). If we view it biologically, the surrogate motherhood, which helps couples to
give birth to children, is a kind of violation to the rule of nature. In this manner,
assisted reproduction technology should be strictly restricted, and because that the
help to those infertile couples are the reason why medical treatments are created, so
based on the modifying concept, only infertile couples should be allowed to apply to
surrogacy.
In conclusion, depending on the ethical doubts, the biological violation and the
complex connection between surrogate mother and the infants mentioned above,
surrogate motherhood is still a dangerous “occupation.” The essay agrees with
Taiwan’s ARTs law that only allows those physically infertile couples to apply to
surrogate motherhood, which is a kind of help for them to have their own child.
Except the special condition these infertile couples are facing, no other possible usage
of surrogacy should be allowed!
REFERENCES (use MLA format)
1. Marwin M. Shaykh. “Assisted Reproductive Technology.” Web.
< http://www.dcmsonline.org/jax-medicine/2000journals/may2000/art.htm >
2. Guy Ringler, M.D. “Gay Man, Gay Dad: Gay Men Can Become Fathers.” The
American Fertility Association. Web.
3. “Vietnamese surrogate mothers to return home.” Bangkok Post. 01 Mar. 2011.
Web. <
http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/health/224002/vietnamese-surrogate-mothersto-return-home >
4. Jonathan Pitts. “Pros and Cons of Surrogate Motherhood.” Health Guidance. Web.
<http://www.healthguidance.org/entry/11782/1/Pros-and-Cons-of-Surrogate-Moth
erhood.html>
5. The Legislative Yuan of Republic of China. “ARTs Acts.”
<
http://www.ly.gov.tw/upload/01_introduce/0103_leg/public/200707231008150.pdf
>
6. John A. Roberston. “Reproductive Technolgy in Germany and the United States:
An Essay in Comparative Law and Bioethic.” Columbia Journal of Transnational
Law 2004: 226. Print.
7. J. A. Land. “Risks and complications in assisted reproduction techniques: Report
of an ESHRE consensus meeting.” Oxford Journals. Feb, 2003 (vol 18): 455-457.