Sifris Ronli, Sifris Adiva
Senior Lecturer, Monash University Faculty of Law; Deputy Director, Castan Centre for Human Rights Law.
Associate Professor, Monash University Faculty of Law; Director, Clinical Units.
J Law Med. 2019 Dec;27(2):369-386.
Following the decision of Bernieres v Dhopal (2017) 324 FLR 21; [2017] FamCAFC 180 it seems that intended parents of children born via overseas compensated surrogacy arrangements will not be recognised as legal parents in Australia. This decision results in harmful outcomes for children and represents a missed opportunity for the Full Court of the Australian Family Court to resolve this issue. Therefore, this article is intended to act as a plea for a review of the approach. Acknowledging the difficulties faced by the Family Court in attempting to resolve issues of parentage in compensated surrogacy cases within the parameters of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), the authors suggest two possible alternative approaches. These approaches would enable the Court to stay true to the existing legislative framework while at the same time achieving what is clearly the desirable outcome for the children; that is: having their intended and functional parents recognised as their legal parents.
继伯涅雷斯诉德霍帕尔案（2017）324 FLR 21；[2017] FamCAFC 180的判决之后，通过海外有偿代孕安排出生的孩子的意向父母在澳大利亚似乎不会被认定为合法父母。这一判决给孩子带来了有害后果，也代表着澳大利亚家庭法院合议庭解决这一问题的机会错失。因此，本文旨在呼吁对该方法进行审查。作者们承认家庭法院在试图依据1975年《澳大利亚联邦家庭法》的框架解决有偿代孕案件中的亲子关系问题时面临的困难，提出了两种可能的替代方法。这些方法将使法院能够忠实于现有的立法框架，同时实现对孩子来说显然是理想的结果，即：让他们的意向父母和实际履行父母职责的人被认定为他们的合法父母。
