The Gazette  Friday, February 27, 2004

Many difficult and controversial issues coexist under the aegis of what politicians call assisted human reproduction. Bill C-13, which was passed by the House of Commons last October and is currently under review by a Senate committee, will attempt to deal with many of these and fill a longstanding vacuum in Canadian law.

Some are moral no-brainers. Most Canadians will support, we believe, a ban on the creation of embryonic clones and the sci-fi scenarios this could entail.

Other elements of the bill are more debatable. If the bill passes as is, for example, women in Canada will not be able to accept a fee for serving as surrogate mothers. The Montreal parents of two boys born to surrogates are lobbying the committee to reconsider this prohibition.

Unfortunately, surrogacy itself is a theme with several variations. Egg, sperm or both might come from donors rather than the prospective parents. This opens the possibility of male homosexual couples raising families through surrogates - surely a right that would swiftly follow the legalization of gay marriage. Nor is the prospect of a boom in late-middle-age parentage to be discounted. And what a disaster this could be: To have a child implies the obligation to raise that child through his or her teenage years, if not beyond.

The specific procedure under discussion, however, is the implantation of a fertilized egg (typically from a mother who has suffered miscarriages) into the womb of another woman. This surrogate then carries the child (unambiguously the genetic offspring of the prospective parents) to term. If Bill C-13 does not ban this practice outright, then our legislators presumably have no ethical objection to it. Why, then, should a surrogate mother be denied the right to charge a fee?

The answer has to do with vague fears about the commodification of human life, and somewhat more specific concerns about the potential exploitation of women who are weak or needy. But these concerns can be dealt with short of an outright ban. A minimum age of 21 (for all concerned) is a good idea. Since doctors will administer the procedure, it should not be difficult to arrange psychological tests for potential surrogates. What no one needs is a rash of surrogate mothers suddenly demanding access to babies that are not, in any genetic or parental sense, theirs.

It all might sound like trouble worth avoiding. Indeed, surrogacy is in a sense a marginal issue since the majority of babies are, and will continue to be, conceived and born the traditional way. But the sad reality is some couples who want families are denied the opportunity by their own bodies. If paid surrogacy solves their problem, let it, with suitable safeguards built in