Henrion Roger
Bull Acad Natl Med. 2014 Apr-May;198(4-5):917-50.
After first defining surrogacy, distinguishing between cases in which the pregnancy results from the surrogate's own egg or a donor egg, and examining the different configurations of male homosexual families, the authors outline French and foreign legislation and provide a summary of the literature and of French working group hearings. Arguments for and against lifting the ban on surrogacy for gay couples are examined. The main arguments for lifting the ban are the following: 1) the same-sex couple's desire to start a family from their own gene pool, 2) current obstacles to adoption, 3) the notion of equality between heterosexual and homosexual couples, 4) frequent recourse to surrogacy abroad, which is not only very costly but also leaves the child in a state of legal limbo on its return to France, and 5) the lack of access to therapeutic alternatives. Some arguments against lifting the ban are of a medical nature: (1) physical and psychological risks for the surrogate, 2) the fact that exchanges between the mother and fetus during pregnancy are more complex than previously thought (microchimerism, epigenetics) and never negligible, and 3) the physical and psychological risks for the child. Other arguments are of an ethical nature: 1) surrogacy may undermine the status of motherhood, 2) surrogacy is becoming a societal rather than a medical issue, implying a profound bioethical upheaval, 3) the increasing commercialization of the human body, 4) subjugation of women to men's desires, 5) the risks for the surrogate's own couple and children, and for the host couple, 6) unavoidable financial aspects, and (7) the risk of abuse. The aim of this study is to bring together all the factors potentially influencing the health consequences of surrogacy, for both the mother and the child, especially if surrogacy were to be legalized for male homosexual couples. Surrogacy raises issues far beyond purely medical considerations and is primarily a societal issue that must be settled by the legislator: Short-term and especially long-term physical and psychological risks, particularly for the child, are poorly documented. If it is decided to legalize surrogacy, then a rigorous, objective and strictly regulated program must be set up to assess the related risks.
在首先定义代孕、区分怀孕是源于代孕女性自己的卵子还是捐赠卵子的情况,并审视男同性恋家庭的不同构成形式之后,作者概述了法国及国外的立法情况,并对相关文献及法国工作组听证会情况进行了总结。文中探讨了支持和反对解除对男同性恋伴侣代孕禁令的论据。支持解除禁令的主要论据如下:1)同性伴侣希望从自身基因库组建家庭;2)当前收养存在障碍;3)异性恋和同性恋伴侣平等的观念;4)频繁在国外寻求代孕,这不仅成本高昂,而且孩子回国后会处于法律上的不确定状态;5)缺乏治疗替代方案。一些反对解除禁令的论据具有医学性质:(1)代孕女性面临的身体和心理风险;2)孕期母亲与胎儿之间的交流比之前认为的更为复杂(微嵌合体、表观遗传学)且绝不可忽视;3)孩子面临的身体和心理风险。其他论据具有伦理性质:1)代孕可能损害母亲身份的地位;2)代孕正成为一个社会问题而非医学问题,意味着深刻的生物伦理动荡;3)人体商业化加剧;4)女性受制于男性的欲望;5)代孕女性自己的伴侣和孩子以及委托夫妇面临的风险;6)不可避免的经济因素;7)滥用风险。本研究的目的是汇集所有可能影响代孕对母亲和孩子健康后果的因素,特别是如果男同性恋伴侣代孕合法化的话。代孕引发的问题远不止纯粹的医学考量,它主要是一个必须由立法者解决的社会问题:短期尤其是长期的身体和心理风险,特别是对孩子而言,记录并不充分。如果决定使代孕合法化,那么必须设立一个严格、客观且严格监管的项目来评估相关风险。