From a seldom-mentioned procedure to a prime-time story, the past two weeks have been highly informative on the subject of child surrogacy. The public has become rightly concerned in the wake of several cases which have exposed some very seamy goings on in the world of surrogacy. There is danger, however, that calls for immediate action could wind up harming many innocent people — most of all, the babies. The Australian proposal for a transition period to bring in responsible regulations deserves serious consideration.
While surrogacy has been no secret in Thailand, it existed for many years without serious regulation. Officials worked on drafting legislation to govern the practice, but without urgency. There was no public demand for action. No recent government saw the need to move surrogacy to the top of the legislative agenda. In hindsight, this was an error.
But now that it is clear that abuses have taken place, the rush to get a set of regulations in place could complicate the error. Last week, immigration officers at Suvarnabhumi airport stopped several foreign couples from leaving the country with "their" surrogate babies. The reason for this was unclear; no official took responsibility for issuing the order. But the result has been to bring surrogacy to a halt. It is not at all clear whether this is desirable.
One fact that has become evident over the past two weeks since the media began reporting on the case of baby Gammy is that Thailand is by far the favourite place for Australian couples to find surrogate mothers. There are many reasons for this. Surrogacy involves big money; typically millions of baht spent over a year or more for each birth.
Prospective parents, clinics, surrogate mothers, "matchmaking" agents and others are involved in the process where a Thai surrogate is impregnated, agrees to carry a baby from gestation to birth, then to give it up to the "real" parents.
In short, surrogacy is a business. This does not, as some have alleged, make it wrong. In Thailand and around the world, there are thousands of couples unable to have a child in the normal fashion. Many critics demand that such couples should adopt a child. But many prospective parents want a child that is theirs, using the wife's egg, the husband's sperm — either or both — but via a surrogate mother.
Australian officials estimate at least 150 babies are affected by the order to bar couples from taking surrogate children out of Thailand. Other nationalities are involved, so there are hundreds more babies involved.
A sudden change in rules is unfair to these parents, but massively unfair and possibly injurious to the babies. This puts the entire problem backwards, since it is the innocent newborns who deserve the greatest attention, the best chance and the opportunity to be united with loving parents. The new rules risk placing babies under state care, in an orphanage, while adults argue over a new law.
Clearly, regulation of child surrogacy is necessary. But even more urgently and plainly, newborn babies and those about to be born to surrogate mothers deserve compassion. The Australian suggestion to proceed with caution is worthwhile.
Authorities should vet the parents expecting a surrogate child. Australia and other countries can, and should, help in this process. If more parents like the convicted Australian paedophile are found, action must be taken.
But unless such parents are clearly unfit, they should be united with their babies while the authorities work on a proper surrogacy bill for the future.