Breaking out of the Regulatory Delusion. The Ban to Surrogacy and the Foundations of European Constitutionalism

Author:

Calderai Valentina1

Affiliation:

1. Universita degli Studi di Pisa Dipartimento di Giurisprudenza , Pisa 56126 , Italy

Abstract

Abstract The transnational market of reproductive services puts a strain on western European States that refuse to acknowledge surrogacy contracts on public policy grounds. The cases decided so far rise three questions. First, under what circumstances foreign surrogacy judgements should be recognised? Second, what would be the constitutional repercussions of the recognition of these judgements? Third, how would it be like a legislation at once effective and respectful of fundamental rights of all parties involved? This Article analyses these questions and how they relate to each other. Based on a transaction-cost economic framework an argument is made that neither top-down, nor market-based regulatory solutions overcome the constitutional arguments that uphold the ban to surrogacy. An alternative approach to legal reform is considered, grounded on IPL and substantive domestic measures.

Publisher

Walter de Gruyter GmbH

Subject

Law,Political Science and International Relations

Reference102 articles.

1. Allen, Adeline A. 2018. “Surrogacy and Limitations to Freedom of Contract: toward Being More Fully Human.” Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 41 (3): 753–811.

2. Allen, Anita L. 1996. “The Socio-Economic Struggle for Equality: the Black Surrogate Mother.” In Applications Of Feminist Legal Theory, edited by D. Kelly Weisberg, 1117–25. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

3. Arendt, Hannah. 1976. The Origins of Totalitarianism. New York: Harvest Book.

4. Arnold, Stefan. 2016. “Fortpflanzungstourismus und Leihmutterschaft im Spiegel des deutschen und österreichischen internationalen Privat- und Verfahrensrechts.” In Das Recht der Fortpflanzungsmedizin 2015. Analyse und Kritik, edited by S. Arnold, E. Bernat, and Ch. Kopetzki, 125–67. Wien: Manz.

5. Aynès, Laurent. 2001. “Le préjudice de l’enfant né handicapé: le plant de Job devant la Cour de Cassation.” Dalloz 6: 492–96.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3