Gay couples lose surrogacy access

[Asguard]

Gay couples lose surrogacy access

Adeliade Now
JOANNA VAUGHAN, POLITICAL REPORTER
June 19, 2008 12:30am

AN amendment to give same sex couples legal access to gestational surrogacy was rejected by the Upper House last night.

Labor MLC Ian Hunter introduced an amendment to the surrogacy Bill that would allow anyone who had been in a domestic relationship – including those in a same sex relationship – access to gestational surrogacy, on the grounds of making the Bill non-discriminatory to gay couples.
The Legislative Council last night passed the Bill to allow gestational surrogacy, which is a medical process usually used as a last resort when a woman cannot carry a child.

The practice was illegal in South Australia, but allowed in the Australian Capital Territory and New South Wales.

Under the procedure, a fertilised egg is implanted in a surrogate, who carries the child.

Upon birth, the surrogate relinquishes the child to the commissioning couple.

The surrogacy Bill was introduced by Liberal MLC John Dawkins in 2006 following reports that couples had travelled interstate to have the treatment, only to return home to face legal issues.

At the time, it was reported that some parents were so desperate to get their child legally recognised, they were committing medical fraud.

Mr Hunter said although it would be unlikely for gay couples to ever use gestational surrogacy, it was not fair to write legislation that discriminated people on their sexuality.

"We thrashed out the domestic partners bill in this place two years ago, giving same sex couples legal wrights, and now to have new legislation that is discriminatory towards them is just deplorable," he said.

Mr Hunter who chaired a social development committee investigating gestational surrogacy and has previously supported the legislation, said he could not vote for it if his amendment was defeated.

The amendment was easily defeated with all Liberal members, some Labor including Carmel Zollo and Bernard Finnigan and Family First voting it down.

It was supported by Labor MPs Mr Hunter and John Gazolla, Greens MLC Mark Parnell, Democrats Sandra Kanck and Independent Ann Bressington.

viewed 19/06/08 at 9:00

How sad, are our political leaders becoming more cowardious by the second?
For those who read my thread on double dissilusionment you will notice that in the nows is family first (being a far right christan group) and in the yes are the greens. On topic however when are people going to take the steps nessary to end this sort of blatant discrimination?
I wonder if women after the vote had this much trouble (though being a women was never an illegal act so they never started as far behind i guess)

 

[Tiassa]

Maybe they ... um ... er ... yeah.

How sad, are our political leaders becoming more cowardious by the second?

Maybe it's just an immediate reaction. I mean, after I read about Clay Aiken°, my first reaction was, indeed, "Okay, this has gone too far."

Of course, my rational side soon reasserted itself: It's not a gay-parent thing, obviously, but, rather, a Clay Aiken thing.

To the other, though, I have not attempted to confirm this story from a more reliable source. I don't want to know.

Clay Aiken is going to be a father. You heard me.

Now, now, calm down! He didn’t have to go near a vagina or anything repulsive like that! (Eeeewww, gurl! Ga-ROSssssss!) To clarify, Clay Aiken is going to be a Turkey Baster Dad. As in, he, um, "inseminated" someone. Hang in there, we’re almost done.

According to an unfathomable report from something called “Dlisted.com” (never heard of them), Clay Aiken has, after tremendous effort and much gay porn, somehow managed to squeeze enough wan and tepid man-juice out of those sad little Aiken nuts of his to actually knock up a real live…well, um, a woman. A woman called Jaymze. (I am not making this up.) And "Jaymze" is, holy Jesus, fifty years old. Which is kind of old. And Clay Aiken’s sad little sperm somehow wrestled down one of her 10,000 year old eggs, and life happened, and now the entire mess is —-even as we speak! —-dividing and squirming and forming the creature that will someday grow to be The Turkey Baster Heir of Aiken.

And Jesus wept.

(Ryan)

____________________

Notes:

° read about Clay Aiken — It was an accident! I swear! Okay, okay, it wasn't. I usually enjoy Adrian Ryan's melodramatic spatters, although the title of this one should have been enough of a warning to stay the hell clear.

Works Cited:

Ryan, Adrian. "Clay Aiken Bangs a Baster, Now Official Breeder!". Slog. May 30, 2008. http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/05/clay_aiken_bangs_a_baster_now_official_b

 

[Orleander]

so even thought the child would genetically belong to one of them, they still can't do it. Hell, just grit your teeth and have sex. I'd find some way to get around the law while trying to fight it.

 

[Asguard]

actually no orleander.

For starters a surigot has NO legal powers over the child (they cant force custody ect) apart from what the parents chose to give them (the same with egg and sperm donors)

Then there is the fact that the same sex partner CANT adopt the child under current law so only ONE parent would be legally recgonised as such. So only the biological "parent" can authorise medical treatment, can pick the child up from school, can claim a dependent on there tax ect

 

[Orleander]

One of the men has sex with the woman. She gets pregnant. The mom can abandone the baby at birth, severing parental rights, the biological gay father can claim the child.
No, the other same sex person can't claim the child, but they have a child. At the very least, you could make the other man the child's guardian upon the death of the father.
If you are that desperate for a child, its what you do while fighting the law.
And my in-laws and parents can make medical decisions about my children. Its just a matter of filling out forms at the doctors and with our insurance. And anyone on our list at school can pick up the kids at school. Again, just a matter of filling out a form.

(and really? Surigot? In a thread you started with surrogate in it, you spell it surigot. I understand you have learning disabilities, but come on! :bugeye

 

[Prince_James]

I frankly think it is an extremely ghoulish practice that is completely callous to the child.

We need to draw lines in the sand for society to function. We're letting all those lines be washed away.

 

[Asguard]

no orelander you cant make the parent gardian or anything else, THE LAW SPECIFICALLY FORBIDS IT (as was shown so sensitivly in the recent debate in the federal parliment). They are concidered to be less than a room mate as far as the courts are concerned. I agree that technically there could be an unoffical surgocy (hell they could even do it with 10 mill suringe, i buy them all the time from my petstore) and the mother could agree to get the hell out of the childs life. BUT the actuall parent (ie the one who raises and loves them) can NEVER claim any sort of parental responcability over that child.

Just take this senaro for a second, the legal parent and the child are driving along and are involved in a car crash. The parent is killed instantly and the childs kidneys are so badly damaged he needs an URGENT tansplant. Under current law the parnter couldnt even agree to donate the organs

Under the next stage of law the partner can agree to donate those kidneys but CANT AUTHORISE THEM PUT IN THE CHILD

 

[shorty_37]

This world is becoming more and more fucked up! No wonder there are more fucked up kids then ever before.

 

[Orleander]

....Just take this senaro for a second, the legal parent and the child are driving along and are involved in a car crash. The parent is killed instantly and the childs kidneys are so badly damaged he needs an URGENT tansplant. Under current law the parnter couldnt even agree to donate the organs

Under the next stage of law the partner can agree to donate those kidneys but CANT AUTHORISE THEM PUT IN THE CHILD

Huh? Wouldn't that be up to the doctors?

 

[Asguard]

what?

You have never signed a medical releace form to alow treatment on yourself, your partner or your children?

 

[Orleander]

If my kids arrives at the hospital with a life threatening injury, they take care of them. They don't stop to ask "Is it ok if we do surgery to stop the bleeding?"

 

[Asguard]

if they need a kidney they have to get a signiture from you authrising treatment. they cant just do it (though in reality its just a formality because if the parent refuses they go to the guardianship board who tell them to do it anyway)

However say that kid now died to, you cant turn off the life surport on either of them untill the passage of this bills. Once the bills pass you can turn off your partners machine but not your childs.

actually it doesnt matter that you cant turn off your childs machine because you have no right to even SEE your child because your not family

 

[24x7e-marketing]

Surrogacy in India

Commercial surrogacy has been legal in India since 2002.India is emerging as a leader in international surrogacy. Indian surrogates have been increasingly popular with fertile couples in industrialized nations because of the relatively low cost.

IN India Rotunda Clinic offers Surrogacy program to people of all nationalities. At rotunda they believe in making babies, is possible for all, including lesbian and gay couples and even single men and single women can be benighted.

How sad, are our political leaders becoming more cowardious by the second?
For those who read my thread on double dissilusionment you will notice that in the nows is family first (being a far right christan group) and in the yes are the greens. On topic however when are people going to take the steps nessary to end this sort of blatant discrimination?
I wonder if women after the vote had this much trouble (though being a women was never an illegal act so they never started as far behind i guess)

 

[Asguard]

doesnt mean anything. Even if an australian same sex couple went to india to get it done the other person would still be denied parental rights when they came back to australia.

if that biological parent died and the child was in a PVS, then that remaining parent would have no ability to stop treatment for that person. if they were on life surport they would have no ability to have it turned off. if they died they would have no ability to either donate organs OR bury that child. they couldnt even legally see them in intensive care

 

[Balerion]

What a disgusting story. It's all being afraid of the Religious Right, as if there was anything to fear. Ugh.

 

[24x7e-marketing]

Gay Parent - Lesbian Parent

For gay & lesbian family surrogate and surrogacy services for all nationalities,All couples including lesbian and gay couples and even single men and single women can avail this facility to fulfill their dream of enjoying parenthood.

iwannagetpregnant.com

 

[Carico]

How sad, are our political leaders becoming more cowardious by the second?
For those who read my thread on double dissilusionment you will notice that in the nows is family first (being a far right christan group) and in the yes are the greens. On topic however when are people going to take the steps nessary to end this sort of blatant discrimination?
I wonder if women after the vote had this much trouble (though being a women was never an illegal act so they never started as far behind i guess)

Next thing you know, serial killers will cry discrimination when thy are sent to prison. The poor innocent souls.