Close Menu
    What's Hot

    Hurt by Non-Veg? Then Why Order from a Non-Veg Restaurant

    June 12, 2025

    Registered But Not Owned? Supreme Court Drops a Legal Bombshell

    June 10, 2025

    SC Slams Allahabad HC’s “Insensitive” Rape Remarks, Stays Order

    March 26, 2025
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    Trending
    • Hurt by Non-Veg? Then Why Order from a Non-Veg Restaurant
    • Registered But Not Owned? Supreme Court Drops a Legal Bombshell
    • SC Slams Allahabad HC’s “Insensitive” Rape Remarks, Stays Order
    • Education Behind Bars: A Progressive Move or a Risky Precedent?
    • No Maintenance for Working Wife, Rules Supreme Court
    • X Sues Centre Over Alleged Misuse of IT Act to Block Content
    • Delhi High Court Directs Bar council of india to Enroll Korean Attorney in Two Days
    • Maintenance Law Seeks Equality, Not Idleness
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    Legal MitraLegal Mitra
    Demo
    • Home
    • Editorials
    • Articles Category
      • Law Focus
      • Law to Life
      • Law Tech
      • Cover Story
      • HOUMOUR
      • Legal Desk
      • International
      • Matrimony
      • Women
      • Cyber Crime
    • Magazine Issues
    • Authors
    Legal MitraLegal Mitra
    Home » News » SURROGACY IN INDIA
    Law to Life

    SURROGACY IN INDIA

    A Shift Towards Inclusivity
    Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Telegram Tumblr Email
    Share
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email

    The Surrogacy Act 2021, effective from January 2022, prohibited commercial surrogacy, allowing only altruistic surrogacy. This act aimed to protect women’s reproductive rights by prohibiting surrogates from receiving any financial compensation, except for insurance and medical coverage.

     

    Surrogacy, a complex arrangement involving the bearing and birth of a child for another person, has been a topic of intense debate in India. The practice, often described as the “renting of the womb”, raises a myriad of moral, ethical, legal, and medical questions.

    Traditionally, surrogacy has been divided into two categories, traditional and gestational. In traditional surrogacy, the surrogate mother is the biological parent of the child, conceived with the intended father’s sperm. In contrast, gestational surrogacy involves the surrogate mother carrying an embryo created through in vitro fertilisation, thus having no genetic link to the child.

    The Surrogacy Act 2021, effective from January 2022, prohibited commercial surrogacy, allowing only altruistic surrogacy. This act aimed to protect women’s reproductive rights by prohibiting surrogates from receiving any financial compensation, except for insurance and medical coverage.

    However, in a significant development, the government has indicated its intention to review the prohibition on the use of donor eggs and sperm in surrogacy arrangements. This decision is part of an ongoing evaluation of surrogacy regulations, acknowledging the need for a comprehensive review to align with evolving societal norms and advancements in medical technology.

    The current regulations, which ban the use of donor eggs and sperm in surrogacy, are being scrutinised for their potential impact on the accessibility and inclusivity of surrogacy procedures. Advocates argue that allowing the use of donor gametes could broaden options for individuals and couples grappling with fertility challenges.

    This reconsideration is a response to the changing landscape of assisted reproductive technologies and a growing awareness of diverse family structures. The government’s readiness to engage in this dialogue signifies a shift towards more inclusive reproductive policies.

    ALSO READ

    The Ram Lalla Tent

    In response to a petition, the Centre assured the Supreme Court of its commitment to making a swift decision on the surrogacy law amendment that banned the use of donor gametes. The top court had granted relief to petitioners, declaring the amendment prima facie in violation of the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act. Rule 7 of the Act, which prohibits donor gametes, has faced criticism for limiting access to surrogacy relief for many women.

    The Supreme Court urged the government to reconsider the amendment, emphasising the need to address concerns expressed by a significant number of women and asserting that such relief should not be restricted to a small group.

    The review becomes important in light of a notification from March of the previous year, which imposed restrictions on single women (either widows or divorcees) opting for surrogacy. It required them to use their own eggs and donor sperms.Several women, feeling their hopes of parenthood were dashed, filed petitions with the Supreme Court. The bench granted similar relief to six women from Kerala, Maharashtra, Haryana, and Uttar Pradesh. This move by the government could potentially open up new avenues for these women and many others who wish to become parents through surrogacy.

    The government’s decision to review these laws could mark a significant step towards more inclusive and accessible surrogacy procedures in the country. However, it remains to be seen how these changes will be implemented and what impact they will have on the surrogacy landscape in India. As the government navigates this complex issue, it will be crucial to ensure that any changes to the law protect the rights and interests of all parties involved. This evolving narrative of surrogacy in India is a testament to the country’s commitment to adapt and grow in the face of changing societal norms and medical advancements.

    End

    READ NEXT

    legal moral Supreme Court SURROGACY The Surrogacy Act 2021 vitro fertilisation
    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email

    Related Posts

    Registered But Not Owned? Supreme Court Drops a Legal Bombshell

    June 10, 2025

    SC Slams Allahabad HC’s “Insensitive” Rape Remarks, Stays Order

    March 26, 2025

    Education Behind Bars: A Progressive Move or a Risky Precedent?

    March 22, 2025

    No Maintenance for Working Wife, Rules Supreme Court

    March 22, 2025

    Bombay High Court Clears Gautam Adani in Rs 388 crore Market Violation Case

    March 17, 2025

    Supreme Court Gives Auroville a Green Signal for Development, NGT Order Axed

    March 17, 2025
    Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

    Top Posts

    The Fasli Year

    July 13, 2023160 Views

    HANUMAN’S JOURNEY OF GUIDANCE

    June 24, 2023150 Views

    BETTING A HIGH-STAKES DEBATE

    June 21, 2023104 Views
    Categories
    • Agastya Sharma (2)
    • August 2023 (19)
    • August 2024 (7)
    • Cover Story (21)
    • Cyber Crime (3)
    • Editorial (5)
    • Featured (44)
    • Featured Videos (3)
    • Feb-March 2024 (23)
    • February 2024 (2)
    • Gadgets (1)
    • HOUMOUR (3)
    • International (7)
    • January 2024 (27)
    • June – July 2024 (37)
    • June 2025 (2)
    • June-2023 (10)
    • Khushboo Sharma (2)
    • Latest in Tech (3)
    • Law Focus (14)
    • Law Medics (2)
    • Law Tech (8)
    • Law to Life (43)
    • Legal Desk (6)
    • Legal Mitra – E Magazine (1)
    • Maarisha Sharma (1)
    • March 2025 (11)
    • May-2023 (16)
    • Most Recent (97)
    • New Arrivals (63)
    • News (57)
    • November 2024 (6)
    • October 2023 (8)
    • October 2024 (9)
    • riteBOL (95)
    • Ritesh Sharma, Editor (25)
    • Shipra Sharma (3)
    • Tech & Work (1)
    • Todays Picks (1)
    • Trending (6)
    • Uncategorized (5)
    • Women (8)
    Don't Miss

    Hurt by Non-Veg? Then Why Order from a Non-Veg Restaurant

    In a quirky consumer dispute, the Mumbai Consumer Court dismissed a ₹6 lakh compensation claim…

    Registered But Not Owned? Supreme Court Drops a Legal Bombshell

    June 10, 2025

    SC Slams Allahabad HC’s “Insensitive” Rape Remarks, Stays Order

    March 26, 2025

    Education Behind Bars: A Progressive Move or a Risky Precedent?

    March 22, 2025
    Stay In Touch
    • Facebook
    • YouTube
    • TikTok
    • WhatsApp
    • Twitter
    • Instagram
    Most Popular

    The Fasli Year

    July 13, 2023160 Views

    HANUMAN’S JOURNEY OF GUIDANCE

    June 24, 2023150 Views

    BETTING A HIGH-STAKES DEBATE

    June 21, 2023104 Views
    Our Picks

    Hurt by Non-Veg? Then Why Order from a Non-Veg Restaurant

    June 12, 2025

    Registered But Not Owned? Supreme Court Drops a Legal Bombshell

    June 10, 2025

    SC Slams Allahabad HC’s “Insensitive” Rape Remarks, Stays Order

    March 26, 2025
    Legal Mitra
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram YouTube
    • Home
    • About Legal Mitra
    • Editorials
    • Article Categories
    • Contact Us
    © 2025 Legal Mitra. Designed by CREADIG.

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

    Go to mobile version