Answer

Introduction

The Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021, aims to prevent commercial exploitation of surrogate mothers and regulate assisted reproductive technology. However, by prohibiting surrogacy for couples with secondary infertility seeking a second child, it raises critical concerns regarding reproductive autonomy and the protection of personal liberty under Article 21.

Body

Reproductive Autonomy & Right to Life

• Restriction on Secondary Infertility: Couples who have previously had a child are barred from surrogacy even when medically unable to conceive again.
  Eg: The Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021, disallows surrogacy for a second child unless the first child has a life-threatening or severe disability.
• Parenthood as a Component of Life: Article 21 encompasses the right to make reproductive choices, including the number of children.
• Ignoring Medical Realities: Legal definitions do not recognize secondary infertility caused by conditions like PCOS or endometriosis.
  Eg: A couple facing secondary infertility due to lifestyle-related or medical factors is ineligible, despite legitimate medical need.
• Emotional and Psychological Strain: The prohibition imposes stress, anxiety, and feelings of helplessness on couples desiring a second child.
  Eg: Couples are forced to either accept involuntary childlessness or seek alternatives outside regulated frameworks.
• Overreach Beyond Intended Safeguards: While intended to prevent commercial surrogacy, the law also blocks voluntary and ethical surrogacy.
  Eg: Couples seeking surrogacy altruistically are restricted under Section 4(iii)(C)(II), despite no risk of exploitation.

Reproductive Autonomy & Personal Liberty

• Personal Liberty Includes Reproductive Decisions: Article 21 protects individual autonomy over reproductive choices without state interference.
• Arbitrary Classification Between Primary and Secondary Infertility:  The law differentiates arbitrarily between first-time and secondary infertility, creating unequal treatment.
  Eg: Couples with one biologically healthy child are denied surrogacy, while natural conception remains unrestricted.
• State Oversight Intrudes Private Life: Mandatory notification and approval processes violate privacy and personal liberty.
  Eg: Couples must inform the authorities two months in advance and undergo scrutiny to prove eligibility for surrogacy.
• Unequal Access to Assisted Reproductive Technology: Restrictive provisions prevent equitable use of ART for all eligible citizens.
  Eg: Recent Supreme Court relaxations for couples with frozen embryos show that flexibility is possible without compromising ethics.
• Feasible Balance Between Protection and Autonomy: Law can safeguard surrogate mothers while still respecting reproductive autonomy.

Suggested Reforms

• Include Secondary Infertility in Eligibility: Amend the Act to allow couples with medically diagnosed secondary infertility to access surrogacy.
• Distinguish Between Commercial and Altruistic Surrogacy: Clearly differentiate ethical, voluntary surrogacy from commercial exploitation to avoid blanket restrictions.
  Eg: Couples using altruistic surrogates should not face the same prohibitions as commercial arrangements.
• Streamline Notification and Approval Process: Simplify bureaucratic procedures to reduce intrusion into private reproductive choices.
• Medically Informed Legal Framework: Incorporate medical expertise in defining infertility and eligibility criteria.
  Eg: Include lifestyle-related infertility, secondary infertility, and previous pregnancy complications as valid grounds for surrogacy access.
• Flexible Interpretation and Judicial Oversight: Allow courts to interpret provisions in favor of reproductive autonomy while ensuring surrogate protection.
  Eg: Supreme Court’s relaxation for couples with frozen embryos demonstrates that flexibility can coexist with ethical safeguards.

Conclusion

A balanced way forward would involve expanding the Surrogacy Act to recognize secondary infertility, ensuring reproductive autonomy while retaining safeguards against exploitation. By adopting a flexible, medically informed approach, the law can protect surrogate mothers and uphold couples’ rights to personal liberty and family planning.

DOWNLOAD PDF