Department of Philosophy, Northern Illinois University, Zulauf 915, DeKalb IL 60115, USA.
Bioethics. 2010 Sep;24(7):341-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2010.01829.x.
Many critics of commercial surrogate motherhood argue that it violates the rights of children. In this paper, I respond to several versions of this objection. The most common version claims that surrogacy involves child-selling. I argue that while proponents of surrogacy have generally failed to provide an adequate response to this objection, it can be overcome. After showing that the two most prominent arguments for the child-selling objection fail, I explain how the commissioning couple can acquire parental rights by paying the surrogate only for her reproductive labor. My explanation appeals to the idea that parental rights are acquired by those who have claims over the reproductive labor that produces the child, not necessarily by those who actually perform the labor. This account clarifies how commercial surrogacy differs from commercial adoption. In the final section of the paper, I consider and reject three further child-based objections to commercial surrogacy: that it establishes a market in children's attributes, that it requires courts to stray from the best interests standard in determining custodial rights, and that it requires the surrogate to neglect her parental responsibilities. Since each of these objections fails, children's rights probably do not pose an obstacle to the acceptability of commercial surrogacy arrangements.
许多商业代孕的批评者认为，它侵犯了儿童的权利。在本文中，我将回应这一观点的几个版本。最常见的版本声称代孕涉及儿童买卖。我认为，虽然代孕的支持者通常未能对这一反对意见做出充分回应，但这一反对意见是可以克服的。在表明儿童买卖反对意见的两个最突出的论点都失败后，我解释了委托夫妇如何通过仅向代孕母亲支付其生殖劳动报酬来获得亲权。我的解释诉诸这样一种观点，即亲权是由对产生孩子的生殖劳动有要求的人获得的，而不一定是由实际进行劳动的人获得的。这种解释阐明了商业代孕如何与商业收养不同。在本文的最后一节，我考虑并拒绝了商业代孕的另外三个基于儿童的反对意见：它在儿童属性上建立了一个市场，它要求法院在确定监护权时偏离最佳利益标准，以及它要求代孕母亲忽视她的父母责任。由于这些反对意见都没有成立，儿童的权利可能不会对商业代孕安排的可接受性构成障碍。
