A "Parenting Licence" Granted by One’s Existing Children? Critical Analysis of the Judgment in Ex Parte JCR 2022 5 SA 202 (GP)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2023/v26i0a14694Keywords:
surrogacy, best interests, reproductive health rights, equality, dignity, privacyAbstract
In Ex parte JCR 2022 5 SA 202 (GP) the Pretoria High Court per Neukircher J seeks to introduce new requirements for all surrogacy agreements in South African law. The court considered the psychological impact of surrogacy on the children of both the surrogate parents and the commissioning parents and the need to put in place procedures ‘for preparing them for this process [of not bringing the surrogate baby home]’ or ‘for a new addition to their family’, respectively. The court ordered the mandatory psychological assessment of the existing children of the surrogate parents and commissioning parents. A report emanating from such an assessment would ostensibly assist the court in determining the best interests of the existing children of the parties to the agreement.
We argue that the psychological evaluation of the existing children of the parties to a surrogate motherhood agreement fundamentally upsets the balance between the interests of the parties involved in the surrogacy process. In fact, it shifts the balance of power almost entirely into the hands of the existing children, such that they may be said to decide whether their parents allowed to have any more children. We argue that the court’s interpretation that such assessments would be in the best interests of existing children, is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the court’s duty in this regard. The new assessment requirement is more likely to undermine these children’s interests, to violate the commissioning parents’ constitutional rights to dignity and equality, and their rights to reproductive autonomy, privacy, and access to reproductive healthcare.
Downloads
References
Bibliography
Literature
Birenbaum J "Contextualising Choice: Abortion, Equality and the Right to Make Decisions Concerning Reproduction" 1996 SAJHR 485-503 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02587203.1996.11834921
Blyth E and Cameron C "The Welfare of the Child. An Emerging Issue in the Regulation of Assisted Conception" 1998 Human Reproduction 2330-2249 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/13.9.2339
Bonthuys E and Broeders N "Guidelines for the Approval of Surrogate Motherhood Agreements: Ex Parte WH" 2013 SALJ 485-495
Domar AD et al "The Prevalence and Predictability of Depression in Infertile Women" 1992 Fertility and Sterility 1158-1163 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(16)55562-9
Emory RE, Otto RK and O'Donohue WT "A Critical Assessment of Child Custody Evaluations: Limited Science and a Flawed System" 2005 Psychological Science in the Public Interest 1-29 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2005.00020.x
Fourie L and Botes A "Disability Discrimination in the South African Workplace: The Case of Infertility" 2018 IJHR 910-932 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13642987.2018.1485657
Gould JW and Posthuma A "The Unsubstantiated Claims of Turkat's Harmful Effects of Child-Custody Evaluations on Children" 2016 Court Review 160-167
Hernandez E "To Bear or Not to Bear: Reproductive Freedom as an International Human Right" 1991 Brook J Int'l L 309-358
Lakatos E et al "Anxiety and Depression Among Infertile Women: A Cross-Sectional Survey from Hungary" 2017 BMC Women's Health 1-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-017-0410-2
Lince-Deroche N et al "Achieving Universal Access to Sexual and Reproductive Health Services: The Potential and Pitfalls for Contraceptive Services in South Africa" 2016 South African Health Review 95-108
Mills L "Certainty about Surrogacy" 2010 Stell LR 429-437
Pillay R and Zaal FN "Surrogate Motherhood Confirmation Hearings: The Advent of a Fundamentally Flawed Process" 2013 SALJ 475-485
South African Law Commission Report on Surrogate Motherhood (Project 65) (Pretoria SALC 1993)
South African Law Commission Review of the Child Care Act (Project 110) (Pretoria SALC 2002)
Shozi B "Something Old, Something New: Applying Reproductive Rights to New Reproductive Technologies in South Africa" 2020 SAJHR 1-24 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02587203.2020.1776632
Thaldar D "The Need to Develop Objective Criteria for Suitability as a Surrogate Mother: Reflections on Ex Parte KAF" 2018 SAJBL 35-37 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7196/SAJBL.2018.v11i1.618
Thaldar D "Criteria for Assessing the Suitability of Intended Surrogate Mothers in South Africa: Reflections on Ex Parte KAF II" 2019 SAJBL 61-66 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7196/SAJBL.2019.v12i2.00670
Thaldar D and Shozi B "Procreative Non-Maleficence: A South African Human Rights Perspective on Heritable Human Genome Editing" 2020 The CRISPR Journal 32-36 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/crispr.2019.0036
Turkat ID "Harmful Effects of Child-Custody Evaluations on Children" 2016 Court Review 152-158
Turoy-Smith KM Exploring the Interviewing of Children for Family Law Matters (Doctor of Psychology (Forensic)-thesis Deakin University 2019)
Turoy-Smith KM, Powell MB and Brubacher SP "Professionals' Views about Child Interviews for Family Law Assessments" 2018 Family Court Review 607-622 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12379
Van der Toorn J, Pliskin R and Morgenroth T "Not Quite Over the Rainbow: The Unrelenting and Insidious Nature of Heteronormative Ideology" 2020 Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 160-165 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2020.03.001
Case law
AB v Minister of Social Development 2017 3 BCLR 267 (CC)
AD v DW 2008 3 SA 183 (CC)
B v S 1995 3 SA 571 (A)
Centre for Child Law v Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development 2009 2 SACR 477 (CC)
Certification of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 1996 4 SA 744 (CC)
Dawood v Minister of Home Affairs; Shalabi v Minister of Home Affairs; Thomas v Minister of Home Affairs 2000 3 SA 936 (CC)
De Reuck v Director of Public Prosecutions (Witwatersrand Local Division) 2004 1 SA 406 (CC)
Du Toit v Minister for Welfare and Population Development 2003 2 SA 198 (CC)
Ex Parte Applications for the Confirmation of Three Motherhood Agreements 2011 6 SA 22 (GSJ)
Ex Parte JCR 2022 5 SA 202 (GP)
Ex Parte KAF 2019 2 SA 510 (GJ)
Ex Parte KAF (14341/17) 2017 ZAGPJHC 227 (10 August 2017)
Ex Parte WH 2011 6 SA 514 (GNP)
Fletcher v Fletcher 1948 1 SA 130 (A) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.1.4561.1065
Fraser v Children's Court Pretoria North 1997 2 SA 218 (CC)
Harksen v Lane 1997 1 SA 300 (CC)
Minister of Finance v Van Heerden 2004 6 SA 121 (CC)
Minister of Health v Treatment Action Campaign (No 2) 2002 5 SA 721 (CC)
Minister of Welfare and Population Development v Fitzpatrick 2000 7 BCLR 713 (CC)
Nandutu v Minister of Home Affairs 2019 5 SA 325 (CC)
Naude v Fraser 1998 4 SA 539 (SCA) DOI: https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1998.0011183X003800020056x
President of the Republic of South Africa v Hugo 1997 6 BCLR 708 (CC)
S v Howells 1999 1 SACR 675 (C) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230510845_1
Surrogacy Advisory Group v Minister of Health (50683/2020) 2022 ZAGPPHC 558 (19 July 2022)
Legislation
Child Care Act 74 of 1983
Children's Act 38 of 2005
Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996
Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 4 of 2000
Internet sources
NeJaime, Douglas and Siegel, Reva B. and Barak-Erez, D, Surrogacy, Autonomy, and Equality (September 11, 2020). 2020 Global Constitutionalism Seminar Volume, Yale Law School http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3732265 accessed 21 April 2023 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3732265
Parliamentary Monitoring Group 1999 Draft Report: Discussion: Report of SA Law Commission on Surrogate Motherhood https://pmg.org.za/committee-meeting/6785/ accessed 21 April 2023
University of Chicago Law School – Global Human Rights Clinic 2019 Human Rights Implications of Global Surrogacy https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/ihrc/10 accessed 21 April 2023
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Dr Willene Holness, Prof Brigitte Clark, Ms Aliki Edgcumbe, Dr Freddy Mngyongani, Dr Sheetal Soni, Dr Bonginkosi Shozi, Prof Donrich Thaldar
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.