header-logo header-logo

Surrogacy update planned

07 June 2019
Issue: 7843 / Categories: Legal News , Family
printer mail-detail
Insufficient regulation & lack of clarity means current laws ‘no longer fit for purpose’

Surrogacy laws would be overhauled, regulation and oversight tightened, and intended parents given rights at birth, under radical reforms proposed by the Law Commission.

Surrogacy is currently legal in the UK, but the Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission believe the laws are outdated. Under their proposals, intended parents would be allowed to become legal parents when the child is born rather than having to apply to court for a parental order, which can take several months. The surrogate would retain a right to object for a short period after the birth.

A regulator would be created to oversee surrogacy organisations, and a national register would be set up to allow those born of surrogacy arrangements to access information about their origins. All parties entering into a surrogacy arrangement would be required to have counselling and take independent legal advice, to reduce the risk of the arrangement breaking down.

The Law Commissions have not put forward any proposals regarding payment of the surrogate, although they do propose that surrogacy organisations remain non-profit. Instead, the consultation asks questions around the categories of payment that intended parents should be able to make.

Launching the 498-page consultation, ‘Building families through surrogacy’, this week, Law Commission chair Sir Nicholas Green said: ‘More and more people are turning to surrogacy to have a child and start their family.

‘However, the laws around surrogacy are outdated and no longer fit for purpose. We think our proposals will create a system that works for the surrogates, the parents and, most importantly, the child.’

The law governing surrogacy came into effect in the 1980s. The two Commissions believe there is insufficient regulation, making it difficult to monitor the surrogacy process and ensure standards are maintained. For example, intended parents can legally pay ‘reasonable expenses’ to the surrogate, but this is unclear and difficult to apply in practice.

Lady Paton, chair of the Scottish Law Commission, said: ‘Surrogacy has become a significant issue in today’s society. The interests of all the parties involved must be properly regulated and protected. That is the focus of our proposals.’

The consultation closes on 27 September 2019.

Issue: 7843 / Categories: Legal News , Family
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll