Skip to main content

The Legal Status of Surrogacy in Latin America

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 212 Accesses

Part of the book series: International Library of Ethics, Law, and the New Medicine ((LIME,volume 79))

Abstract

Under the Inter-American Human Rights System, individuals have a right to access reproductive technologies. This is so in virtue of the 2012 Inter-American Court of Human Rights landmark reproductive rights decision in Artavia Murillo v. Costa Rica, in which the Court held that a complete ban on reproductive technologies, and assisted reproductive technologies in particular, interferes with the right to a private and family life, which includes the decision to become a parent, as well the option and access to the means to materialize that private decision. In spite of the Artavia Murillo ruling, the legal status of surrogacy agreements in State Parties to the American Convention on Human Rights is uncertain. This paper examines whether surrogacy is compatible with the Inter-American System of Human Rights. It focuses on three types of potential objections to the legalization of surrogacy: “corruption arguments,” that is, the idea that surrogacy corrupts maternity; “child welfare concerns,” that is, the idea that surrogacy should not be allowed because of its effects on resulting children; and the potential exploitation of surrogates. The author of this article concludes that these objections are not convincing but that the American Convention on Human Rights requires regulatory schemes that protect the rights of surrogates, intending parents, and children.

This paper is based on two previous papers on surrogacy in Latin America (Hevia 2018; Hevia forthcoming 2018).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Article 11(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights establishes that each person has a right to respect for his/her honor and recognition of his/her dignity. In addition, article 11(2) states that “[n]o one may be the object of arbitrary or abusive interference with his private life, his family, his home, or his correspondence, or of unlawful attacks on his honor or reputation.” Article 11(3), in turn, establishes that this right must be protected by law.

  2. 2.

    Id.

  3. 3.

    Abrams, supra note 50, at 188.

  4. 4.

    For a general theory of relational autonomy, see Nedelsky (2011).

  5. 5.

    Id., at 1254–1255.

References

  • Abrams, P. 2015. The bad mother: stigma, abortion and surrogacy. J Law Med Ethics 43: 179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baby, M. 1988. 109 N.J. 396, 537 A.2d 1227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banfi Vique, A., O. Cabrera, F. Gómez-Lugo, and M. Hevia. 2011. The Politics of Reproductive Health Rights in Uruguay: Why the Presidential Veto to the Right to Abortion is Illegitimat. J Health Law 12: 192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bassan, S. 2016. Shared Responsibility Regulation Model for Cross-Border Reproductive Transactions. Mich J Int’l L 37: 299–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, D. 2001. Communitarianism. In: The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed Edgar N. Zalta. Available at http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/communitarianism/. Last visited May 5, 2018.

  • Brining, M.F. 1995. A Maternalistic Approach to Surrogacy: Comment on Richard Epstein’s Surrogacy: The Case for Full Contractual Enforcement. Virginia Law Review 81: 2377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, G. 2012. Response: Rethinking Sperm-Donor Anonymity: Of Changed Selves, Nonidentity, and One-Night Stands. Geo L J. 100: 431–435.

    Google Scholar 

  • Convention on the Rights of the Child, November 20, 1989, 1577 U.N.T.S. 3, art. 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Defensor del Pueblo de la Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires y Otros c. GCBA y Otros s/amparo, judgment of 4-08-2017 (Argentine Appellate Chamber for Administrative Law and Taxation, 2017).

    Google Scholar 

  • Duff, R.A. 1993. Choice, Character, and Criminal Liability. Law and Philosophy 12: 345–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, R. 1995. Surrogacy: The Case for Full Contractual Enforcement. Virginia Law Review 81: 2305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hevia, M. 2018. Liberalismo y Gestación por Sustitución. In Entre la Libertad y la Igualdad. Ensayos Críticos Sobre la Obra de Rodolfo Vázquez, 301–311. México: UNAM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hevia, M. 2018. Surrogacy, Privacy, and the American Convention on Human Rights. Forthcoming. Journal of Law and Biosciences 5: 375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hevia, M., and C.H. Vacaflor. 2013. From Recognition to Regulation: The Legal Status of In Vitro Fertilization and the American Convention on Human Rights. Florida Journal of Intonational Law 25: 453.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamm, E. Argentina. 2013a. In International Surrogacy Arrangements: Legal Regulation at the International Level, ed. K. Trimmings and P. Beaumont, 5–24. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamm, E. Venezuela. 2013b. In International Surrogacy Arrangements: Legal Regulation at the International Level, ed. K. Trimmings and P. Beaumont, 397. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamm, E., and N. Rubaja. 2016. Parámetros Jurisprudenciales en los Casos de Gestación por Sustitución Internacional. Los Lineamientos del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos y sus Repercusiones en el Contexto Global. Revista de Bioética y Derecho 37: 149–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laufer-Ukeles, P. 2013. Mothering for Money: Regulating Commercial Intimacy. Indiana Law of Journal 88: 1123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murillo, A. et al. 2012. Inter-American Court of Human Rights (In Vitro Fertilization) v. Costa Rica; November 28, 2012 CDH-12.361/177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nedelsky, J. 2011. Law’s Relations: A Relational Theory of Self, Autonomy, and Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parfit, D. 1987. Reasons and Persons, 359. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelzman, J. 2018. Womb for Rent: Gestational Surrogacy Contracts—A New Path for Outsourcing Service Contracts. Available at https://www2.gwu.edu/~iiep/assets/docs/papers/Pelzman_IIEPWP2010-30.pdf. Last visited Jan 16, 2018.

  • Posner, R.A. 1989. The Ethics and Economics of Enforcing Contracts of Surrogate Motherhood. Journal of Contemporary Health Law and Policy 5: 21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. 1993. Political Liberalism, 139–140, 217. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Satz, D. 2013. Por Qué Ciertas Cosas No Deberían Estar a la Venta. Los Límites Morales de los Mercados: Los Mercados en la Reproducción Femenina 13 Revista Argentina de Teoría Jurídica. http://www.utdt.edu/download.php?fname=_135092683913866300.pdf. Last visited May 5, 2018.

  • Tecú, J., and E. Guatemala Lamm. 2013. In International Surrogacy Arrangements: Legal Regulation at the International Level, ed. K. Trimmings and P. Beaumont, 167. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thaler, R.H., and C. Sunstein. 2008. Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trebilcock, M. 1993. Paternalism in The Limits of Freedom of Contract, 155. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warnock, M. et al. 1984. Report of the Committee of Inquiry into Human Fertilisation and Embriology. London. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin Hevia .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Hevia, M. (2019). The Legal Status of Surrogacy in Latin America. In: Rivera-López, E., Hevia, M. (eds) Controversies in Latin American Bioethics. International Library of Ethics, Law, and the New Medicine, vol 79. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17963-2_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics