Let me take you around the world in Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) news in 800 words.
Pinterest is Awesome. Pinterest is the super-popular site that lets you sell your home-made goods online. Wait, I mean it lets you send pictures that are erased after a few seconds. Hold on, wrong again. Pinterest lets you, er, pin stuff? Although I am not totally up on the site and its functionality, I can confirm that the company is showing signs of being a great employer. This week, Pinterest announced that starting July 1, its 500+ employees will be eligible to receive up to $5,000 in adoption assistance, and up to $20,000 in surrogacy assistance. Great news!
Pinterest’s head of Diversity and Inclusion (the ultimate in 21st Century Silicon Valley executive positions) reported that the move was a result of feedback from its employees. Specifically, the executive said that she had a discussion with one employee who was looking to have a child with his spouse through surrogacy, but struggling to figure out the financial piece (surrogacy costs quickly hit six figures).
Heading To Legalweek? Come Join Above The Law!
Meet the team in NYC at our Monday night happy hour — 3/9 at 7pm. RSVP required.
The newly announced benefits are on top of the company’s generous (for the United States) 16 weeks of parental leave, and $20,000 in fertility benefits.
Another Country Re-Considers Its Surrogacy Ban. Denmark currently sits with the majority of other European countries on the issue of surrogacy. That stance is a complete ban on surrogacy, whether paid or altruistic. Doctors in Denmark are even legally prohibited from transferring an embryo to a woman to carry a child for another. But that hardly matters, since a woman who gives birth in Denmark is legally considered the mother of the child she delivers, regardless of intent or genetics.
There is, however, a glimmer of hope. One of the Danish political parties (I assume the good one?) has taken the stance that surrogacy should be legal. The Liberal Alliance party argues that Danes shouldn’t have to travel to the United States to have a child through surrogacy, but instead should be able to look locally for help. “The screening model used [for prospective surrogates] in the U.S. sounds very sensible and could form the basis for a similar law in Denmark,” remarked the Liberal Alliance’s health spokesperson.
Denmark even has a growing pro-surrogacy lobbying organization, called DARE. (No word on whether they also want you to stay off of drugs.) The Danish DARE advocates for the legalization of surrogacy in Denmark. It endorses the libertarian view of surrogacy: that surrogacy is a form of fertility treatment, and that the state should not be involved in such matters.
Humans in the Loop: The People Powering Trusted Legal AI
As the use of artificial intelligence permeates legal practice, a critical question confronts every legal professional who uses these tools: Can I trust this?
While we can’t yet declare this a victory, it’s at least good news, with some hope on the horizon.
Don’t Tell Denmark about India. Unfortunately, we turn to some weird news now. In India, a story recently broke that the police raided a Hyderabad health clinic. The raid revealed that 45 surrogates were possibly being held “captive.” I put the word “captive” in quotes because the news story also puts that word in quotes. Apparently, journalists are not yet clear about whether the women were in fact captives or not. In fact, the story seems almost more concerned that the hospital was not properly licensed for the fertility services they were offering. I mean, sure, that’s important. But it buries the lede a little. Were 45 women prevented from leaving a hospital for 9 months, or not?
We know from reports that the women were provided food, medical services, and possibly a monthly allowance (or fee after the birth) to carry another couple’s child. While interviews with the women indicate that they were there of their own volition—hoping to earn money to support their own families—there remain deep concerns about whether their participation was “economically” coerced, and whether they received adequate medical treatment. Indeed, although the women have been theoretically “rescued,” they continue to stay at the hospital, since there isn’t a better place available for pre-natal treatment and other support while being pregnant.
Assuming the women were not physically forced to become surrogates, and had the power to leave the hospital if they desired, the optics of the controversy are worse than the reality. Naturally, having 45 surrogates in a single hospital might look like something out of a sci-fi movie. But assuming that everyone involved was truly a consenting adult, perhaps this isn’t the human trafficking scenario critics fear.
There will certainly be arguments about whether abject poverty truly left these women able to validly “consent.” And the law should certainly protect women who are coerced by others to become surrogates. But preventing coercion does not need to equate to prohibiting women from making decisions about their own health and wellness.
Now if India were to agree, and Pinterest were to expand into India (the site is fascinatingly currently blocked in India), hopeful parents would be in luck!