blogger delicious digg diigo facebook googleplus linkedin netlog reddit twitter
Skip Navigation LinksJRI > Archive > July-September 2008, Volume 9, Issue 2 > Consultations and Health Assessments in Surrogacy



Volume 9, Issue 2, Number 35 / July-September
(pages 107-114)


Consultations and Health Assessments in Surrogacy




Avicenna Infertility Clinic, Avicenna Research Institute (ACECR), Tehran, Iran

 Corresponding Author
Reproductive Biotechnology Research Center, Avicenna Research Institute, ACECR, Tehran, Iran

Reproductive Biotechnology Research Center, Avicenna Research Institute, ACECR, Tehran, Iran

Reproductive Biotechnology Research Center, Avicenna Research Institute, ACECR, Tehran, Iran


Related Articles
in Google Scholar in PubMed

 

Other Format
pdfPDF Full Text (En) pdfPDF Full Text (Fa) pdfePUB Full Text (En) pdfPDF Abstract (En) pdfPDF Abstract (Fa) pdf BibTeX pdfRefMan pdfEndNote xmlPMC XML online readerPMC Reader

 


Abstract
Introduction: Surrogacy is defined as a procedure through which the owner of the uterus carries the fetus of another woman and based on an agreement the surrogate mother will overturn the baby upon delivery to the couples who have provided the gametes. The eligibility of applicant couples seeking surrogacy treatment should be assessed in terms of their reproductive potentiality, as well as the uterus owner’s, to determine their therapeutic protocol by relevant specialists. In this regard, physical and psychological health assessments of the two parties, their full recognition of suggested therapeutic procedures, along with compliance of the treatment processes with legal, cultural, social and Sharia laws should be taken into account. Recognition of the surrogates’ motives can lead infertile couples to select the right candidate. Research on the subject has revealed that selection of surrogate candidates among relatives or friends minimizes problems raised by such treatment options. Materials & Methods: The health assessment of surrogacy candidates necessitates approval of their physical health conditions by endocrinologists, health of their reproductive system by gynecologists, mental health by psychiatrists and absence of infectious diseases by relevant specialists. Furthermore, the candidates should neither be addicted to any narcotics or banned substances, nor go to work and be preferably under 35 years old and have a history of at least one healthy child. In addition, further tests for complete assessments of physical health might be needed and ruling out pregnancy risk factors and particularly psychological preparations of both parties are a must. Consultations and mental preparation of parties will enhance the success rate of the treatment. Moreover, continuous supervision and consultation during and after treatment procedures also seem to be of importance. Conclusion: The significance of recognizing problems associated with surrogacy and medical, cultural, social and legal considerations should be born in mind. Reflection of commitments by the two parties in the agreement is an important factor for consultations to be a success. Existence of surrogacy laws will prevent imminent problems and mishaps resulting from unpredicted circumstances.

Keywords: Surrogacy, IVF, Commissioning parents, Infertile couples, Medical consultation, Psychological counseling, Legal and cultural restrictions


To cite this article:


References
  1. MacCallum F, Lycett E, Murray C, Jadva V, Golombok S. Surrogacy: the experience of commissioning couples Hum Reprod. 2003;18(6):1334-42.   [PubMed]
  2. Ciccarelli JC, Beckman LJ. Navigating rough waters: an overview of psychological aspects of surrogacy. J Soc Issues. 2005;61(1):21-43.   [PubMed]
  3. Sullivan L. Surrogacy: the case for a conventional approach. Med Law. 1991;10(4):401-15.   [PubMed]
  4. Golombok S, Murray C, Jadva V, Lycett E, MacCallum F, Rust J. Non-genetic and non-gestational parenthood: consequences for parent-child relationships and the psychological well-being of mothers, fathers and children at age 3. Hum Reprod. 2006;21(7):1918-24.   [PubMed]
  5. Brinsden PR. Gestational surrogacy. Textbook of Assis-ted Reproductive Techniques. Taylor & Francis, an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group: USA, 2004;p: 855-66.
  6. Abbas J, Model human reproduction technologies and surrogacy act. Iowa Law Rev. 1987;72(4):943-1013.   [PubMed]
  7. Steptoe PC, Edwards RG. Birth after the reimplantation of a human embryo. Lancet. 1978;2 (8085):366.   [PubMed]
  8. Reilly DR. Surrogate pregnancy: a guide for Canadian prenatal health care providers. CMAJ. 2007;176(4): 483-5. Review.   [PubMed]
  9. Sullivan L. Surrogacy: the case for a conventional approach. Med Law. 1991;10(4):401-15.   [PubMed]
  10. Ciccarelli JC, Beckman LJ.Navigating rough waters: an overview of psychological aspects of surrogacy. J Soc Issues. 2005;61(1):21-43.   [PubMed]
  11. MacPhee D, Forest K. Surrogacy: programme compa-risons and policy implications. Int J Law Fam. 1990;4 (3):308-17. No abstract available.   [PubMed]
  12. Drabiak K, Wegner C, Fredland V, Helft PR. Ethics, law, and commercial surrogacy: a call for uniformity. J Law Med Ethics. 2007;35(2):300-9.   [PubMed]
  13. Galbraith M, McLachlan HV, Swales JK. Commercial agencies and surrogate motherhood: a transaction cost approach. Health Care Anal. 2005;13(1):11-31.   [PubMed]
  14. Wilkinson S, The exploitation argument against commercial surrogacy. Bioethics. 2003;17(2):169-87.   [PubMed]
  15. Braude P, Muhammed S. Assisted conception and the law in the United Kingdom. BMJ. 2003;327(7421): 978-81. Review.   [PubMed]
  16. Brinsden PR. Gestational surrogacy. Hum Reprod Update. 2003;9(5):483-91. Review.   [PubMed]
  17. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, Eighth Annual Report & Accounts. First published 1999, ISBN 0 11 322290 4, Printed in the United Kingdom for The Stationery Office.
  18. Jones HW Jr. Commentary on ACOG Committee Opinion Number 88, November 1990-"Ethical issues in surrogate motherhood". Womens Health Issues. 1991;1 (3):13   [PubMed]
  19. Delaisi de Parseval G. To FIV or not to FIV: Will gestational surrogacy be an indication for assisted reproductive techniques? Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2006; 34(9):720-6.   [PubMed]
  20. Synescu K. Personal conversation. Los Angeles, CA. 18 November 1997.
  21. van den Akker OB. Psychosocial aspects of surrogate motherhood. Hum Reprod Update. 2007;13(1):53-62. Review.   [PubMed]
  22. Boivin J, Appleton TC, Baetens P, Baron J, Bitzer J, Corrigan E, et al. European Society of Human Repro-duction and Embryology. Guidelines for counselling in infertility: outline version. Hum Reprod. 2001;16(6): 1301-4.   [PubMed]
  23. American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Psycho-logical assessment of gamete donors and recipients. Fertil Steril. 2004;82 Suppl 1:S18-9.   [PubMed]
  24. Guidelines for the appropriate use of do-not-resusci-tate orders. Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs, American Medical Association. JAMA. 1991;265(14): 1868-71.   [PubMed]
  25. Raziel A, Schachter M, Strassburger D, Komarovsky D, Ron-El R, Friedler S. Eight years' experience with an IVF surrogate gestational pregnancy programme. Reprod Biomed Online. 2005;11(2):254-8.   [PubMed]



Home | About Us | Current Issue | Past Issues | Submit a Manuscript | Instructions for Authors | Subscribe | Search | Contact Us

"Journal of Reproduction & Infertility" is owned, published, and copyrighted by Avicenna Research Institute .
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License which allows users to read, copy, distribute and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited properly.

Journal of Reproductoin and Infertility (JRI) is a member of COMMITTEE ON PUBLICATION ETHICS . Verify here .

©2016 - eISSN : 2251-676X, ISSN : 2228-5482, For any comments and questions please contact us.