PET PET
  • My Account
  • Subscribe
Become a Friend Donate
  • About Us
    • People
    • Press Office
    • Our History
  • Get Involved
    • Become a Friend of PET
    • Volunteer
    • Campaigns
    • Writing Scheme
    • Partnership and Sponsorship
    • Advertise with Us
  • Donate
    • Become a Friend of PET
  • BioNews
    • News
    • Comment
    • Reviews
    • Elsewhere
    • Topics
    • Glossary
    • Newsletters
  • Events
    • Upcoming Events
    • Previous Events
  • Engagement
    • Policy and Projects
      • Resources
    • Education
  • Jobs & Opportunities
  • Contact Us
  • About Us
    • People
    • Press Office
    • Our History
  • Get Involved
    • Become a Friend of PET
    • Volunteer
    • Campaigns
    • Writing Scheme
    • Partnership and Sponsorship
    • Advertise with Us
  • Donate
    • Become a Friend of PET
  • BioNews
    • News
    • Comment
    • Reviews
    • Elsewhere
    • Topics
    • Glossary
    • Newsletters
  • Events
    • Upcoming Events
    • Previous Events
  • Engagement
    • Policy and Projects
      • Resources
    • Education
  • Jobs & Opportunities
  • Contact Us
  • My Account
  • Subscribe
  • Privacy Statement
  • Advertising Policy
  • Thanks and Acknowledgements
PETBioNewsCommentSwitzerland, inter-country surrogacy and public policy

BioNews

Switzerland, inter-country surrogacy and public policy

Published 8 June 2015 posted in Comment and appears in BioNews 805

Author

Michael Wells-Greco

Image by Dr Christina Weis. © Christina Weis
Image by Dr Christina Weis. © Christina Weis

On 21 May 2015 the Swiss Federal Court refused to register a male couple - who are in a civil partnership and living in Saint-Gallen, Switzerland - as the legal fathers of a child born following an inter-country surrogacy arrangement...

On 21 May 2015 the Swiss Federal Court (1) refused to register a male couple - who are in a civil partnership and living in Saint-Gallen, Switzerland - as the legal fathers of a child born following an inter-country surrogacy arrangement.

The background to this case is that the child was born in California to a gestational surrogate, with one of the intending fathers providing the sperm, which was used to fertilise an egg from an anonymous donor. With the consent of the surrogate, and following a judgment of a Californian court, the intending fathers were named as the legal parents and their names were recorded in the child's US birth certificate. The family returned to Switzerland and took steps to be recognised as the child's legal parents.

A court in Saint-Gallen held, in broad terms, that recognition of the joint legal parentage was in the best interests of the child (2). That court stated that to hold otherwise would leave the child with 'limping' legal parentage, particularly as the second intending father would be unable to establish his legal paternity. Echoing in many ways a decision of the Supreme Court of Germany (3), the court in Saint-Gallen held that non-recognition would have negative long-term consequences for the child. Moreover, the court held that the best interests of the child also required that the genetic origins of the child, as well as details of the surrogate, must be recorded in the civil register.

The Federal Justice Department submitted an appeal on 26 September 2015, challenging the registration of the second parent as father. The Federal Court held that the parentage of the second parent established in California could not be recognised in Switzerland - only the intended genetic father and the surrogate would be registered as the child's parents in the Swiss civil registry. There were a number of reasons for this conclusion. Surrogacy and the use of medically assisted reproduction in the context of surrogacy are prohibited in Switzerland, and second-parent adoption is currently restricted to (heterosexual) married couples. For the Federal Court, recognition of a parental status established in California in circumstances where there was no other connection with the USA (such as residence or American nationality of one of the intending fathers) would be 'fundamentally incompatible with Swiss legal and ethical values ([and contrary to] public policy)' (1) and unlawful.

There is a great deal of conflicting information in the media about surrogacy. It should be stressed that this decision was not about whether or not the Swiss prohibition of surrogacy was lawful. There are some things that ought to be decided by a democratically elected parliament rather than by the courts. Instead, the Federal Court had to consider a classic private international law matter - that is, whether the parental status established abroad could be recognised in Switzerland. An important concept for that analysis is the notion of 'public policy'.

With respect to surrogacy, the protection of health or morals, the prevention of crime, or the protection of rights and freedoms of others (in particular the child and the surrogate) there are legitimate broad objectives in public-policy terms for states in specific circumstances to restrict or deny the consequences of a surrogacy arrangement. Yet, returning to the facts of this decision, there is nothing to indicate that these important public-policy issues were at play. Moreover, any such restrictions concerning the identity of an individual (here the child now aged 4) should be proportional to the objective aimed at and acceptable in an open, free, tolerant and pluralistic society. The lawfulness of the arrangements in the state in which this child was born and the informed consent of the surrogate are arguably very relevant to this proportionality exercise. Seen in this light, non-recognition of the parental status could be seen, to paraphrase the European Court of Human Rights, to 'fly in the face of both established fact and the wishes of those concerned without actually benefiting anyone' (4).

Where does that leave us? An important conclusion is that the Federal Court leaves the door ajar to recognition and, as such, it cannot be assumed that legal parentage established abroad following a surrogacy arrangement violates Swiss public policy. This means that Swiss courts and authorities may - albeit in undefined circumstances - recognise a foreign decision on parentage or a birth certificate. How this is applied in practice is yet to be seen, and it is questionable whether in this delicate matter the best interests of the child are served by solutions on a case-by-case basis. The lack of a legal relationship between the child and a second intending parent or intending mother creates very real disadvantages and uncertainties regarding inheritance rights, child custody, parental responsibility, and other day-to-day parental duties. The extent to which a child's family unit enjoys legal recognition has a considerable impact on that child's day-to-day and longer term enjoyment of his or her rights.

It is now for this family to decide whether to make an application to the European Court of Human Rights on the basis of a violation of their Article 8 ECHR right to respect for their private and family life. And it is now for the Swiss Parliament to find long-term solutions. A balance is needed, placing the best interests of the child as a primary consideration, but also respecting the balance that must be achieved between children, intending parents, the surrogate, gamete providers and the state. Listening to the experiences and views of those most affected in these very real family units is a crucial part of any thoughtful responsive process of law and policy reform.

Related Articles

Image by Peter Artymiuk via the Wellcome Collection. Depicts the shadow of a DNA double helix, on a background that shows the fluorescent banding of the output from a DNA sequencing machine.
CC BY 4.0
Image by Peter Artymiuk via the Wellcome Collection. Depicts the shadow of a DNA double helix, on a background that shows the fluorescent banding of the sequencing output from an automated DNA sequencing machine.
Comment
7 September 2015 • 4 minutes read

Baby steps forward, baby steps back: towards a more liberal Swiss regulation of reproduction

by Melanie Levy and 1 others

Switzerland upholds stricter legislation on assisted reproduction and prenatal genetic testing than most European countries. However, recent regulatory changes demonstrate a possible shift towards a more liberal approach....

Image by Bill Sanderson via the Wellcome Collection, © Wellcome Trust Ltd 1990. Depicts Laocoön and his family (from Greek and Roman mythology) entwined in coils of DNA.
Image by Bill Sanderson via the Wellcome Collection, © Wellcome Trust Ltd 1990. Depicts Laocoön and his family entwined in coils of DNA (based on the figure of Laocoön from Greek and Roman mythology).
Comment
3 August 2015 • 3 minutes read

Reform of UK surrogacy laws: the need for evidence

by Professor Eric Blyth and 2 others

Given the complexity of surrogacy practice, we have become concerned that many 'reform' arguments are based on alleged matters of fact: a dangerous state of affairs...

Image by Dr Christina Weis. © Christina Weis
Image by Dr Christina Weis. © Christina Weis
News
24 July 2015 • 3 minutes read

Gay parents blocked from leaving Thailand with surrogate baby

by Julianna Photopoulos

A male same-sex couple have been stuck in Thailand with their baby daughter for the past six months, after the surrogate mother refused to allow them to leave the country claiming they are not 'an ordinary couple'...

Image by Dr Christina Weis. © Christina Weis
Image by Dr Christina Weis. © Christina Weis
Comment
15 June 2015 • 5 minutes read

Seeking views on surrogacy in the UK

by Dr Kirsty Horsey

A working group from Surrogacy UK has devised an online survey seeking views on people's experiences of surrogacy in the UK and opinions on the way it is regulated...

Image by Dr Christina Weis. © Christina Weis
Image by Dr Christina Weis. © Christina Weis
Comment
17 February 2014 • 3 minutes read

What are the best interests of the child in international surrogacy?

by Professor Eric Blyth and 2 others

As the surrogacy industry grows, so too do calls from parts of the consumer lobby, fertility industry and others for a loosening of international and domestic restraints on surrogacy arrangements...

Image by Dr Christina Weis. © Christina Weis
Image by Dr Christina Weis. © Christina Weis
News
3 June 2013 • 2 minutes read

International surrogacy arrangements need parental orders, says UK judge

by Dr Antony Starza-Allen

A UK High Court judge has said applications for parental orders in international surrogacy cases should be encouraged and made promptly...

Image by Dr Christina Weis. © Christina Weis
Image by Dr Christina Weis. © Christina Weis
Reviews
15 January 2013 • 5 minutes read

Event Review: Assisted Reproduction and Surrogacy - A Modern Approach to Parenthood or Brave New World?

by Daniel Malynn

Hosted by 7 Bedford Row chambers, this intellectually stimulating event highlighted the uncertainty and lack of consensus around surrogacy law. However, such was the emphasis on surrogacy the event title was never formally answered. Yet I nevertheless came away with the feeling that some key issues in surrogacy, applicable to the wider agenda of assisted reproduction, were thoroughly explored. Moreover, it established some momentum to press for law reform in the area....

Image by Dr Christina Weis. © Christina Weis
Image by Dr Christina Weis. © Christina Weis
Comment
23 May 2011 • 3 minutes read

Crossing borders for surrogacy: the problems for families and policymakers

by Natalie Gamble

More people are crossing borders to build their families than ever before. Prospective parents can easily access information about treatment options in countries where regulations permit treatments outlawed in the UK or where there is little or no regulation at all. But where surrogacy is involved, going abroad raises very difficult legal issues....

Image by Dr Christina Weis. © Christina Weis
Image by Dr Christina Weis. © Christina Weis
News
9 June 2009 • 2 minutes read

High Court rescues surrogate twins from international custody limbo

by Ben Jones

A British couple this week won custody over a pair of twins born to a surrogate mother in the Ukraine. The twin babies were caught in a legal loophole whereby the expectant British couple were unable to bring the twins into the UK, as they were not...

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

« A TripAdvisor for fertility clinics - would you recommend it?

Data-Label The UK's Leading Supplier Of Medical Labels & Asset Labels

RetiringDentist.co.uk The UK's Leading M&A Company.
easyfundraising
amazon

This month in BioNews

  • Recent
4 July 2022 • 4 minutes read

Widening the debate about direct-to-consumer genetic testing and donor conception

4 July 2022 • 3 minutes read

Join PET and Genomics England to celebrate the 200th birthday of Gregor Mendel

27 June 2022 • 4 minutes read

Thirty years of PET: our 'Fertility, Genomics and Embryo Research' report

27 June 2022 • 5 minutes read

Children's rights and donor conception: What next?

20 June 2022 • 4 minutes read

The problems with lifting donor anonymity earlier

Subscribe to BioNews and other PET updates for free.

Subscribe
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • RSS
Wellcome
Website redevelopment supported by Wellcome.

Website by Impact Media Impact Media

  • Privacy Statement
  • Advertising Policy
  • Thanks and Acknowledgements

© 1992 - 2022 Progress Educational Trust. All rights reserved.

Limited company registered in England and Wales no 07405980 • Registered charity no 1139856

Subscribe to BioNews and other PET updates for free.

Subscribe
PET PET

PET is an independent charity that improves choices for people affected by infertility and genetic conditions.

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • RSS
Wellcome
Website redevelopment supported by Wellcome.

Navigation

  • About Us
  • Get Involved
  • Donate
  • BioNews
  • Events
  • Engagement
  • Jobs & Opportunities
  • Contact Us

BioNews

  • News
  • Comment
  • Reviews
  • Elsewhere
  • Topics
  • Glossary
  • Newsletters

Other

  • My Account
  • Subscribe

Website by Impact Media Impact Media

  • Privacy Statement
  • Advertising Policy
  • Thanks and Acknowledgements

© 1992 - 2022 Progress Educational Trust. All rights reserved.

Limited company registered in England and Wales no 07405980 • Registered charity no 1139856