India bans surrogacy for gay couples and single people

India faces criticism after officials issued new rules barring foreign gay couples and single people from using surrogate mothers to become parents. Commercial surrogacy is a booming industry in India, and in recent years the ranks of childless foreign couples looking for a low-cost, legally simple route to parenthood have been joined by gay couples and singles. The measures mark the first step to the regulation of "surrogacy tourism" in India. The rules say foreign couples seeking to enter into a surrogacy arrangement in India must be a "man and woman (who) are duly married and the marriage should be sustained at least two years". The rule changes, posted on the Indian home ministry's website, were denounced by fertility clinics and gay rights activists as "discriminatory". "Parenting is everybody's right and now we're withdrawing that right," said Dr Rita Bakshi, who heads the International Fertility Centre in New Delhi. "These rules are definitely not welcome, definitely restrictive and very discriminatory," she told AFP. "This is a huge heartbreak for homosexual couples and singles," commented fertility doctor Anoop Gupta. Gay rights campaigners also denounced the changes to the rules on surrogacy, which was legalised in 2002. "It's totally unfair - not only for gay people but for people who are not married who may have been living together for years, and for singles," Mumbai gay rights advocate Nitin Karani told AFP. India is a popular destination for gay couples seeking children even though it remains a largely conservative country and only decriminalised consensual sex between homosexuals in 2011. The home ministry would not comment on the changes which stipulate that would-be parents provide proof that their home country will give citizenship to any baby born of a surrogate mother. There have been several publicised cases of babies born through cross-border surrogacy in recent years who have been trapped in citizenship limbo because their parents' countries refused them passports. Surrogacy is banned in some European countries and is subject to strict regulation in the United States. The new India rules, which also state applicants must apply for a medical instead of a tourist visa, come as legislation to regulate the industry has yet to be passed by parliament. The bill says only women aged between 21 and 35 can act as surrogates but sets no minimum payment for the mother. Critics have said a lack of legislation governing surrogacy encourages "rent-a-womb" exploitation of young, poor Indian women. While the government has been pushing the country as a medical tourism destination, the issue of wealthy foreigners paying poor Indians to have babies has raised ethical concerns in many Indian minds. Clinic owners deny ill-treatment of mothers, saying it is in their interest to treat the women well in order for them to have healthy babies, The cost of surrogacy is about $18,000 to $30,000 in India, said Bakshi, of which around $8,000 goes to the surrogate mother. The figure is roughly a third of the US price. Hari Ramasubramanian, founding partner of Indian Surrogacy Law, said the new measures were introduced without "proper consultation" and needed to be challenged in the courts. "A lot of people who will be affected had seen India as a wonderful option for getting into parenthood and now this option is closed. It's quite sad," he said. Article: January 2013 www.telegraph.co.uk

US Lesbian couple to testify on behalf of sperm donor

A Separated lesbian couple have both been summoned to testify on behalf of a sperm donor, with whom they had made a written agreement, but who was ordered to pay child support after they split up. A Kansas judge recently ordered William Marotta, a sperm donor to a lesbian couple, to pay child support after they split up, raising questions of how the law protects sperm donors. Mr Marotta and the couple he donated to did not use official channels, and instead met up using a website, and wrote up their own agreement. Because the US state of Kansas did not have a legal way for same-sex couples to marry, when the couple split up, the Kansas Department of Children and Families sought out the biological father of the child, Mr Marotta, for child support. The court clerk’s office at Shawnee County District Court issued subpoenas on Wednesday for Angela Bauer and Jennifer L Schreiner. Reports suggest that the women have been ordered to appear on 15 February, in order to give depositions to an attorney for William Marotta, HutchNews reports. Laws in other states, such as New Jersey are similar to those in Kansas, said Bari Weinberger, a leading family law attorney, and managing partner of Weinberger Law Group. He said that the judge could legitimately rule that the contract written up by Mr Marotta, and the former couple was void, because they did not use official channels to complete the agreement. Mr Weinberger said that these definitions, and the liability of people in relationships with children in their care to pay child support, needed to be updated and clearly laid out. Article: 25th January 2013 www.pinknews.co.uk Read more about lesbian parenting and finding a sperm donor at www.prideangel.com

http://blogs.prideangel.com/post/2013/01/Fertile---Like-a-sack-of-fresh-compost.aspx

Our first insemination had taken place in mid-July. It had been a trial run. I was hoping to go on maternity leave around June, when my GCSE and A ‘level students’ exams would be over. So getting pregnant about September time would be ideal. We’d read a lot of books on the topic, some suggesting that it might take a year or more of inseminations before one was successful. Somewhere or other I’d read that each insemination has only a 6% chance of success. But then there were all the variables. I was thirty-four years old and was, like a supermarket on Shrove Tuesday, running rather low on eggs – well apparently, according to statistics. Nevertheless, I was healthy and not overweight; I had been taking pre-pregnancy vitamins for three months; my menstrual cycles were regular and I didn’t smoke. And, as a vet, my partner was both adept with a syringe and also very accustomed to poking around in various orifices. So we reckoned on ‘a few months’… maybe three? What when we got to five or six months? Get the sperm tested? Swap to the back-up uterus and egg supply? (The one obvious advantage a lesbian couple have in a quest for children.) We didn’t have a definite plan. I’d said there would be no point in taking a pregnancy test until my period was late: it seemed like a waste. That is until two days before my period was due, when I was overcome with an overwhelming desire to wee on a stick. Aged ten, I had awaited Father Christmas with more patience than this. Would our lives be permanently transformed by a tiny, screaming bundle of chaos, or would they not? I weed on the stick, and it seemed they would not. It had been a trial run and I whilst the statistics were confusing, I knew the chance of it working first time was unlikely. I hadn’t really wanted it to work this month. So the feeling of failure came as a surprise. The knowledge of a lonely, aging egg, taking its chance after thirty-four years of waiting, sighing at the devastating sight of carnage: a million sperm sprawled helplessly across my fallopian tube. Either my body had let me down, or I had let my body down, and we had both let everyone else down. Was I going to have to feel like this every month? My period came with the school holidays: the start of six weeks off work and two weeks off insemination. Time for a glass of wine… Two weeks later and we were returning from a short break in Paris for one day before setting off on a five-hour drive to the south coast to visit relatives. The one day back home was day fourteen, and another wee on a stick confirmed I had ovulated. So, between a hasty unpacking, washing, and repacking, we conveniently managed to fit in a visit from our donor (who was setting off the next day to northern France). We then spent two weeks visiting various relatives around the country, offering a range of imaginative responses as to why I was refusing both alcohol and caffeinated tea. We hadn’t told even close family of the baby project: I didn’t like the idea of their curiosity hanging over us every month like a dead cat, and we knew from coming out four years ago, that they generally coped quite well with surprises. Nevertheless, we were sure they were on to us. After all, the owners of the bed and breakfast at which we’d stayed in Southampton had guessed when I’d asked for my eggs well done. Ten days passed and it was weeing on stick time again. And again the feeling of failure. If I squinted a bit I could sort of see a hint of a blue line, but there was no doubt that it was negative. We hadn’t expected it to work first time, but now a pattern was emerging and the odds against me seemed to be rising. Next time we were to inseminate, I’d be almost thirty-five. Four days later and my breasts were feeling tender. “Pre-menstrual,” I told my partner. “You don’t get that do you?” “Yeah I do…I think I usually do.” But my period should have started today and it was now 11pm. “I think you should wee on a stick.” I hopped back into bed, with the stick, and we watched as a feint blue line began to form. It wasn’t as bold as the control line, but I didn’t have to squint to see it this time. “What do you think?” “I think it could be positive. You’d better do another test tomorrow.” For a good night’s sleep I’d recommend a warm, milky drink and a few pages of a good book. I would not recommend a semi-positive pregnancy test. I lay awake for most of the night and wondered what was happening to my body and why exactly we had decided to ambush the next twenty years of our lives. And, in case it wasn’t actually positive, I added in a chapter of wondering whether it would ever work. The next morning unsurprisingly found me skulking along the medical aisle of the supermarket, like a thirteen-year-old checking out the condoms. I selected a posh one. Digital. Actually flashes up with the word ‘Pregnant’ for those who find judging between shades of blue a little challenging. And, half an hour later back at home, that’s exactly what it did. Pregnant, it told me. And how odd it sounded to have that word describe me. Pregnant was mother, mummy, grown-up and prams. Not me at all. I took a photograph of the stick, for when the digital display had faded after 24 hours, and I didn’t believe it any more. We’d only tried twice. After thirty-four years of trying not to grow up, of confused sexuality and finding a lesbian identity, my body, apparently still as fertile as a sack of fresh compost, had just got straight on with what it had always been designed to do. I was pregnant. Winning article: by Lindsey, West Yorkshire, United Kingdom 27th January 2013

Gay marriage: MPs to vote on new proposals

MPs are set to get their first chance to vote on plans to allow same-sex marriages in England and Wales. The Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill will be debated in Parliament on Tuesday 5 February, the leader of the Commons Andrew Lansley has announced. The bill will allow same-sex marriage and let religious organisations which want to, to offer them, the culture department says. The plans have divided the Conservative Party - its MPs will get a free vote. Labour and the Lib Dems back the proposals to legalise same-sex marriage, but Labour said the exemption for the established Church was "disappointing". The Church of England and Roman Catholics, among other denominations, have voiced opposition to the plans and are expected to oppose the bill, even with its caveats. But some religious groups, including Quakers, Unitarians and Liberal Judaism, are in favour. Culture Secretary Maria Miller told the Commons in December that no religious organisation "will ever be forced to conduct marriages for same-sex couples". She said the legislation - which will published on Friday ahead of the bill's second reading - would include a "quadruple lock" to protect religious freedom. Faith schools The bill is set to specifically exclude the Church of England and Church in Wales to avoid a clash between Canon Law - which defines marriage as that between a man and a woman - and UK civil law. But a spokesman for the Department for Culture, Media and Sport said that if the Church of England did want to opt-in to offering same-sex marriages it could, saying a process for doing so was to be set out in the bill. A public consultation on plans for same-sex marriage received 228,000 submissions. In its response to the consultation the government says it has no plans to change the definition of adultery or non-consummation of a marriage - which means neither could be cited as grounds for divorce in a same-sex marriage, unless the adultery was with someone of the opposite sex. Culture Secretary Maria Miller outlining the government's approach last month They also dismiss the fear that the terms "husband" and "wife" could be removed as a result of same sex marriages. They also say that teachers "particularly in faith schools will be able to continue to describe their belief that marriage is between a man and woman whilst acknowledging and acting within the new legislative position which enables same sex-couples to get married". The Scottish Government has published proposed legislation of its own to introduce gay marriage. Under the plans, religious and faith groups would need to "opt in" to perform same-sex marriages. Article: 24th August 2013 www.bbc.co.uk

Receiving: The recipient parent perspective - London 24th January

JZ Young Lecture Theatre, Ground Floor, Anatomy Building, Bloomsbury Campus, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK 24 January 2013 - 6.30pm-8.30pm The Progress Educational Trust project 'When It Takes More Than Two', supported by the Wellcome Trust, seeks to clarify public and professional understanding of donor conception by focusing on the different parties involved. This second event in the project will focus on the perspective of the recipient of donated sperm or eggs, and is free to attend, but advance booking is required. If you email Sandy Starr at sstarr@progress.org.uk then he will add you to the attendee list. • What traits do gamete recipients prefer in a donor, and what are the scientific facts about the heritability of such traits? Does preferring a tall donor (height is a widely preferred donor characteristic) or deprecating a red-haired donor (the world's largest sperm bank closed its doors to red-haired sperm donors in 2011 due to a reported lack of demand) actually give recipients any assurance as to the height and hair colour of their children? • What of more complex characteristics, such as intelligence and personality? The extent (if any) to which such qualities are heritable is a highly contentious, and yet these same qualities frequently form the basis on which donors are marketed. Donor profiles provided by clinics also include such details as pierced ears, choice of car and favourite pet - can a choice of donor made on such grounds be meaningful, and if so how? • To what extent is it necessary or desirable to seek a 'matching' donor, whose looks resemble those of the recipient couple (at a generic level such as skin colour)? Is this important to avoid inviting questions about a child's provenance, or should we aspire to put such thinking behind us? Are such questions rendered moot by the limited availability of sperm and egg donors in the UK, which can make matching difficult or impossible? • Following donor conception, what are the challenges (if any) involved in raising donor-conceived children? Is it always incumbent upon parents to inform their children of the fact that they are donor conceived, in line with official support for the principle of openness? In what circumstances might parents inform family, friends, colleagues or teachers of the fact that their children are donor-conceived? And what if this is disclosed inadvertently? • What are the specific challenges (if any) faced by non-traditional families, which involve same-sex couples and/or co-parenting arrangements, when it comes to donor conception? What is the impact on such families of being less readily accommodated by established social conventions and institutions? And is this changing? Speakers include: • Dr Nicky Hudson Senior Research Fellow at De Montfort University's School of Applied Social Sciences • Olivia Montuschi Cofounder and Practice Consultant at the Donor Conception Network • Sue Moore Senior Fertility Counsellor at the Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust's Assisted Conception Unit • Professor Marcus Pembrey Founding Chair of Trustees at PET and Emeritus Professor of Paediatric Genetics at University College London's Institute of Child Health • Caroline Spencer Co-Active Coach and Cognitive Behavioural Hypnotherapist at Successfully Single Chair: • Juliet Tizzard Head of Policy and Communications at the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority and former Director of PET Article: 22nd January 2012 www.progress.org.uk

Baby boom in UK pushing maternity services to 'tipping point'

A baby boom has pushed maternity services in the UK to a ''crucial tipping point'', with midwives under intense strain and hospitals struggling to cope. The Royal College of Midwives (RCM) says there is a massive shortage of midwives after some areas of the UK has seen a 50 per cent rise in the number of births in the last few years. In a report to be published in parliament on Tuesday, the RCM warned that an extra 5,000 midwives were needed in England alone to deal with the highest birth rate in 40 years. It is calling on the Government to provide a guarantee not to cut midwife training places. Each of the four parts of the UK has experienced a rise in the number of births in the last decade - 22 per cent in England, 17 per cent in Wales, 15 per cent in Northern Ireland and 12 per cent in Scotland. The RCM said England and Wales had been "overwhelmed" by the rising birth rate, but while midwife numbers were increasing a little the strain on numbers has led to antenatal care of expectant mothers becoming "threadbare". There are also concerns about an ageing number of midwives, with too few following in their footsteps. Cathy Warwick, chief executive of the RCM, said: "England remains around 5,000 midwives short of the number required to provide mothers and babies with high-quality service they need and deserve. "Maternity care is the earliest health intervention of all and getting care right for mothers and babies is a vital part of supporting families and building a foundation for good health in later life." She said that while more midwives are being employed in England and the availability of training is on the rise, efforts need to be redoubled because of the baby boom and the relentless rise in the numbers being born. "A corner is being turned, but this is no time for backsliding from the Government," she said. "Maternity units are under intense strain and have been now for many years, with many midwives really at the end of their tether in terms of what they can tolerate. "We are reaching a crucial tipping point for maternity services in England." The shortage of midwives has forced some NHS maternity hospitals to close their doors and temporarily turn women away who are about to give birth, according to the Sunday Times. An RCM report last year found more than half of NHS trusts had to close their door an average of seven times a year and divert women to other maternity hospitals because they could not cope with numbers, the newspaper said. Jon Skewes, a director at the RCM, said: "We are concerned that our members are so stretched and that in some circumstances units have been forced to close on a temporary basis to ensure safety." The RCM says it would like to see more midwife-led units and more home births to reduce the shortage of midwives, the appropriate deployment of properly trained and supervised maternity support workers and a guarantee from the Government not to cut midwife training places. The State of Maternity Services report showed that in 2011 there were 688,120 babies born in England, the highest number since 1971. Provisional birth numbers from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) for the first half of last year point to 2012 being another record-breaking year for births. The ONS forecasts that births in England could reach 743,000 by 2014. Article: 20th January 2012 www.telegraph.co.uk

'Glad to have gay parents' said majority of Oxford union students

Overwhelming majority of Oxford Union students would be ‘glad to have gay parents’ The outcome of the debate was that the motion of 'gay parents' was supported by a large majority (Image: Ross Brooks) In an Oxford Union debate on Thursday evening, the subject of which being gay parenting, the motion passed with a large majority. The traditional Thursday evening debate, on the topic “this house would be glad to have gay parents”, took place, and the motion was carried with 345 votes to 21. Arguing for the motion, the winning team of the debate, was PinkNews.co.uk and Out4Marriage founder, Benjamin Cohen, gay rights activist, Richard Fairbass of the band Right Said Fred, and Phyll Opoku-Gyimah of Black Pride UK. Debating against the motion was Peter D Williams of Catholic Voices, anti-abortion activist Anthony McCarthy and anti-equality activist, Lynette Burrows. Scott Lively, a staunch anti-gay evangelical Christian, was scheduled to speak at the debate, but was unable to attend because of an administrative oversight which meant he did not travel to the UK. He was replaced on the ‘against’ panel by George Hargreaves, the leader of the Christian Party. Arguing for the motion, PinkNews.co.uk founder, Benjamin Cohen, said: “When I get married to my gay partner I will have a wedding, like my parents did, not a ‘gay’ wedding”. Ms Burrows said as part of her argument against the motion that Benjamin Cohen would be a “pretend father’ and criticised the motion as “sinister”. She went on to say that it would be a “travesty” for any child to have same-sex parents. She also implied that it society should go back to a time when gay people were considered “sodomites”. Scott Lively will speak in two weeks time at another debate on a different topic. In a decision which some found controversial the Oxford Union had previously announced that BNP leader Nick Griffin would “not be turned away” if he decided to attend a scheduled debate on gay parenting, despite Mr Griffin’s official invitation being withdrawn. The invitation to speak at the Thursday evening debate was originally extended to Mr Griffin as a potential speaker against the motion. However, the invitation had been withdrawn after it emerged that the Union member who extended it did not have the proper authorisation to do so. The Union also drew criticism over its decision to invite American author, attorney, and activist Scott Lively. Mr Lively recently termed homosexuality “the issue of the End Times”, and said it would lead to events such as in Noah’s flood. Article: 18th January 2013 www.pinknews.co.uk