Affiliation:
1. Department of Law, Gauhati University Intermed Clinic, FA Road, Machkhowa
2. University Law College, Gauhati University
Abstract
Reproduction is a key element in the continuation of human civilisation. The central unit in a society is family and thereby procreation plays a critical role towards that end. Reproduction in the traditional sense involves physical intercourse between a male and female resulting in the creation of a baby. However, in the past few years, other alternative forms of reproduction have developed. Many factors, particularly infertility and the formation of new family structures have increased the demand for such technologies. Such technologies involve intervention by a third party, a medical expert to facilitate reproduction outside of the traditional method. Such technologies have their benefits, but at the same time, have bioethical issues, including questions of morality, conflict with religious beliefs and violation of human rights. A delicate balance needs to be maintained in this context wherein law and morality, social structures and beliefs play a prominent role. The article intents to draw focus on assisted reproductive technology in context of India and some foreign jurisdictions. The main aim is to provide a critical analysis and review of the normative standards in India.
Reference27 articles.
1. Anan Tapiromkul. “Legal Problems On Commercial Surrogacy In Thailand Under The Protection Of Children Born From Assisted Reproductive Technologies Act, B.E. 2558.” Thammasat Business Law Journal, vol. 5, 2015, so05.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/TBLJ/article/view/111712.
2. Bagri/Anand, N. T. (2021, June 30). A Controversial Ban on Commercial Surrogacy Could Leave Women in India With Even Fewer Choices. Time. https://time.com/6075971/commercial-surrogacy-ban-india/.
3. Bhatia, G. (2019). Case Comment: Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India: The Indian Supreme Court’s Decriminalization of Same-Sex Relations. Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law Online, 22(1), 218–233. https://doi.org/10.1163/18757413_022001010
4. Brahams, Diana. “The Hasty British Ban on Commercial Surrogacy on JSTOR.” The Hastings Centre Report, Feb. 1987, doi.org/10.2307/3562435.
5. Bumiller, Elisabeth. “Mothers for Others.” Washington Post, The Washington Post, 9 Mar. 1983, www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1983/03/09/mothers-for-others/e6944450-f0ff-4174-a5c4-9e5ce916fbb4/.