Keywords
surrogate motherhood
personal positions
How to Cite
Abstract
The objective was to map young Indians’ views regarding the acceptability of surrogacy, and to delineate the circumstances under which surrogacy is considered as especially problematic. In India, the number of fertility clinics currently operating in the whole country is estimated at over 3,000, making India the international leader in surrogacy. Very recently, however, surrogacy has become controversial. Participants (N = 430) were presented with scenarios depicting the circumstances in which a couple has contracted with a surrogate mother, and they were asked to indicate the extent to which such a contract may pose a moral problem. The scenarios involved four factors: the type of surrogacy (traditional or gestational), the mother’s level of autonomy, the family context, and whether surrogacy was of the commercial or the altruistic kind. Four different personal positions were found: a group for which (a) surrogacy always posed a moral problem (22%), (b) traditional surrogacy but not gestational surrogacy always posed a moral problem (15%), (c) surrogacy did not pose a problem each time the husband agrees with the procedure (40%), and (d) a group that chose not to express any position (23%). Although surrogacy is legal and big business, young people’s opinion seems to be divided on this issue. Even those who consider that surrogacy is not within itself an unacceptable procedure disagree regarding the conditions of its acceptability. This complex set of diverging attitudes, if replicated on large, representative samples, may explain the current government wavering on this issue and its recent decision that surrogacy services are forbidden for foreigners.
Anderson, N. H. (2008). Unified social cognition. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Anderson, N. H. (2016). Information Integration Theory: Unified Psychology based on three mathematical laws. Universitas Psychologica, 15(3), 1-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.upsy15-3.iitu
Anderson, N. H. (2018). Moral science. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Athanasou, J. A., & van Esbroeck, R. (Eds.) (2009). International handbook of career guidance. New York, NY: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6230-8
Baby Manji Yamada vs. Union of India & ANR. (2008). Retrieved from http://indiankanoon.org/doc/854968/
Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2008). Principles of biomedical ethics (6th ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Bello, F. A., Akinajo, O. R., & Olayemi, O. (2014). In-vitro fertilization, gamete donation and surrogacy: perceptions of women attending an infertility clinic in Ibadan, Nigeria. African Journal of Reproductive Health, 18(2), 127-133. Retrieved from https://www.ajrh.info/index.php/ajrh/article/view/181
Bhalla, N., & Thapliyal, M. (2013). Foreigners are flocking to India to rent wombs and grow surrogate babies. Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com/india-surrogate-mother-industry-2013-9#ixzz3XSlDAd94
Baykal, B., Korkmaz, C., Ceyhan, S., Goktolga, U., & Basser, I. (2008). Opinions of infertile Turkish women on gamete donation and gestational surrogacy. Fertility and Sterility, 89(4), 817–822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.04.022
Ciccarelli, J. C., & Beckman, L. J. (2005). Navigating rough waters: An overview of psychological aspects of surrogacy. The Journal of Social Issues, 61(1), 21-43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-4537.2005.00392.x
Crawford, S. C. (2003). Hindu bioethics for the Twenty-first Century. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Hofmans, J., & Mullet, E. (2013). Towards unveiling individual differences in different stages of information processing: A clustering-based approach. Quality & Quantity, 47(1), 455-464. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-011-9529-7
International surrogacy laws (2015). Retrieved from http://www.familylaw.com.ua/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=69&Itemid=99&lang=en
Kamble, S., Ahmed, R., Sorum, P. C., & Mullet, E. (2014). The acceptability among young Hindus and Muslims of actively ending the lives of newborns with genetic defects. Journal of Medical Ethics, 40(3), 186-191. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2012-100934
Kamble, S., Sorum, P. C., & Mullet, E. (2012). Young Indians’ views of the acceptability of physician-assisted suicide. International Perspectives in Psychology: Research, Practice, Consultation, 1(3), 165-176. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0029380
Kilic, S., Ucar, M., Yaren, H., Gulec, M., Atac, A., Demirel, F. … Demirel, O. (2009). Determination of the attitudes of Turkish infertile women towards surrogacy and oocyte donation. Pakistan Journal of Medical Science, 25(1), 36-40. Retrieved from https://pjms.com.pk/issues/janmar09/article/article6.html
Law Commission of India. (2008). Need for legislation to regulate assisted reproductive technology clinics as well as rights and obligations of parties to a surrogacy. Retrieved from http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/report228.pdf
Mohebbi Kian, E., Riazi, H., & Bashirian, S. (2014). Attitudes of Iranian infertile couples toward surrogacy. Journal of Human Reproductive Sciences, 7(1), 47-51. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-1208.130847
Mukherjee, K. (2007). Rent-a-womb in India fuels surrogate motherhood debate. Retrieved from http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/02/04/us-india-surrogacy-idUSDEL29873520070204.
Mullet, E., Kpanake, L., Kamble, S., Ahmed, R. A., Bugay, A., Muñoz Sastre, M. T., & Sorum, P. C. (2016). Mapping people’s views regarding physician assisted suicide: A five-country study. International Psychology Bulletin, 20, 16-25.
Patel, N., & Rao, M. (2014). Is surrogacy a legitimate way out of poverty? New Internationalist, 11, 29-32. Retrieved from https://newint.org/sections/argument/2014/11/01/argument-surrogacy-poverty
Petitfils, C., Muñoz Sastre M. T., Sorum, P. C., & Mullet, E. (2017). Mapping people’s views regarding the acceptability of surrogate motherhood. Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology, 35(1), 65-76. https://doi.org/10.1080/02646838.2016.1222358
Rahmani, A., Howard, F., Sattarzadeh, N., Ferguson, C., Asgari, A., & Ebrahimi, H. (2014). Viewpoints of fertile women on gestational surrogacy in East Azerbaijan Province, Iran. Indian Journal of Medical Ethics, 11(1), 29-33. https://doi.org/10.20529/IJME.2014.008
Rahmani, A., Sattarzadeh, N., Gholizadeh, L., Sheikhalipour, Z., Allahbakhshian, A., & Hassankhani, H. (2011). Gestational surrogacy: Viewpoint of Iranian infertile women. Journal of Human Reproductive Sciences, 4(3), 138-142. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-1208.92288
Reilly, D. R. (2007). Surrogacy pregnancy: A guide for Canadian prenatal health care providers. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 176(4), 483-485. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.060696
Saito,Y., & Matsuo, H. (2009). Survey of Japanese infertile couples’ attitudes toward surrogacy. Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics & Gynecology, 30(3), 156-161. https://doi.org/10.1080/01674820802429435
Sedkaoui, H., & Mullet, E. (2016). Mapping French people's views on chemical castration of child and adolescent sex offenders. Universitas Psychologica, 15(3), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.upsy15-3.mfpv
Suzuki, K., Hoshi, K., Minai, J., Yanaihara, T., Takeda, Y., & Yamagata, Z. (2006). Analysis of national representative opinion surveys concerning gestational surrogacy in Japan. European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 126(1), 39-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2005.07.030
World real matters. (2015). Retrieved from http://www.worldmag.com/2015/11/india_moves_to_ban_surrogacy_for_foreign_couples
This journal is registered under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License. Thus, this work may be reproduced, distributed, and publicly shared in digital format, as long as the names of the authors and Pontificia Universidad Javeriana are acknowledged. Others are allowed to quote, adapt, transform, auto-archive, republish, and create based on this material, for any purpose (even commercial ones), provided the authorship is duly acknowledged, a link to the original work is provided, and it is specified if changes have been made. Pontificia Universidad Javeriana does not hold the rights of published works and the authors are solely responsible for the contents of their works; they keep the moral, intellectual, privacy, and publicity rights. Approving the intervention of the work (review, copy-editing, translation, layout) and the following outreach, are granted through an use license and not through an assignment of rights. This means the journal and Pontificia Universidad Javeriana cannot be held responsible for any ethical malpractice by the authors. As a consequence of the protection granted by the use license, the journal is not required to publish recantations or modify information already published, unless the errata stems from the editorial management process. Publishing contents in this journal does not generate royalties for contributors.