The Curing Law: On the Evolution of Baby-Making Markets
Pace University - School of Law
February 19, 2008
Columbia Public Law Research Paper No. 08-167
Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 30, p. 1885, 2009
The article offers a new paradigm to examine the legal regulation of reproductive technologies. The main argument is that a paradigm of cure has shaped historical and current legal baby-making markets. Reproductive technologies that have historically been understood as forms of cure (such as sperm donations and egg donations) have developed into market commodities, while others (such as full surrogacy) which have not been understood as cure, have not. The article examines and critiques the cure paradigm. Specifically, the article challenges one current manifestation of the cure paradigm: the legal distinction between "full surrogacy" (where a surrogate impregnated using her own ova) and "gestational surrogacy" (where an embryo is created in vitro and then transferred into the surrogate's uterus). Gestational surrogacy has been established by many state courts and legislatures as a legitimate form of curing female infertility, while full surrogacy has generally been either prohibited or deemed unenforceable. This distinction is problematized in this article not only because it is based on contestable values, but also because it is has produced serious market failures that have effectively excluded many potential participants from entering the baby-making markets. Thus, the article argues that it is time to reevaluate the cure paradigm, and that the first step in this reevaluation involves the legalization of full surrogacy by state courts and legislators.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 40
Keywords: Contracts, Domestic Relations, Health Law and Policy, Law and Technology, Legal History, Sexuality and the Law, WomenAccepted Paper Series
Date posted: February 21, 2008 ; Last revised: June 29, 2009
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo2 in 0.734 seconds