Altruistic Surrogacy – Ethical Issues and Demographic Differences in Public Opinion

R. Krastev 1  and V. Mitev 1
  • 1 Department of Medical Chemistry and Biochemistry, Medical University, Sofia, Bulgaria

Abstract

This is the first study of the attitude of Bulgarian people towards the allowing of altruistic surrogacy which is prohibited in Bulgaria. This study used an online survey which was active during one year (July 2010-June 2011) and which was answered by 951 respondents between 18-65 years of age. The majority of them (87%) are young people between 18-43 years. The respondents are men and women with secondary, university and medical university education from the capital and the countryside. They have different marital status. The data were treated with statistical package SPSS 16. The link between the demographic characteristics (gender, age, education, marital status and place of residence) and the answers of the respondents was identified. The majority of the respondents (73%) think that the altruistic surrogacy must be allowed in Bulgaria and the main supporters are the women and the residents in the countryside – married or living with partner. Only 38% of the respondents mostly divorced middle aged persons accept the access of same sex couples to surrogacy. The majority of the respondents (53%) fear that the surrogacy may transform poor women into incubators for babies. This opinion is shared by the men, by the youngest and the oldest respondents and by the unmarried persons.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Agacinski S. Maternité pour autrui. Liberation 26 juin 2008 (France).

  • 2. Bruce-Hickman K., Kirkland L. and T. Ba – Obeid. The attitudes and knowledge of medical students towards surrogacy, J. of Obst.& Gyn., 2009; 29(3): 229-232.

  • 3. Brunet I., Mc Candless J., C. Marzo C., et al. Comparative study on the regime of surrogacy in the EU member states. PE 474.403. European Parliament, Brussels, Belgium./2013/ available in (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/committees/en/juri/studiesdownload.html?language.

  • 4. Chliaoutakis JE. A relationship between traditionally motivated patterns and gamete donation and surrogacy in urbain areas of Greece, Human Reprod, 2002; 17(8): 2187-2191.

  • 5. Constantinidis D. and Cook R. Australian perspectives on surrogacy: the ifluence of cognition, psychological and demographic charasteristics, Hum. Reprod, 2012;.27(4): 1080-1087.

  • 6. Ciccarelli J. C., & Beckman L. J. Navigating Rough Waters: An Overview of Psychological aspects of Surrogacy, Journal of Social Issues 2005; 61(1): 21-43.

  • 7. Doctissimo 2011 available in http://bebe.doctissimo.fr/blog/12711-Grande-enquete-de-Doctissimo-sur-la-bio-ethique.html.

  • 8. Frydman R. Contre la grossesse pour autrui, Gynécologie Obstétrique & Fertilité, 2010; 38: 224-225.

  • 9. Golombok S., Murray C., Jadva V., et al. Non-genetic and non-gestational parenthood: consequences for parent-child relationships and the psychological well-being of mothers, fathers and children at age 3, Human Reproduction, 2006; 21(7): 1918-1924.

  • 10. Heikkilä K., E. Länsimies, M. Hippeläinen, S. Heinonen. Assessment of attitudes towards assisted reproduction: a survey among medical students and parous women, Gynecol Endocrinol 2006; 22(11): 613-619.

  • 11. IPSOS, 2009 – 60% des Français favorables à l‘autorisation des mères porteuses, Publié le 28/01/2009 available in http://www.ipsos.fr/recherche/?general-search=meres+porteuses%2C+sondage%2C+2009.

  • 12. Mathieu B., La Bioethique, Éditions Dalloz, 2009, Paris, pp.67-117.

  • 13. Minai, J., Suzuki, K., Takeda, Y., et al. There are gender differences in attitudes towards surrogacy when information on this technique is provided. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology 2007; 132: 193-199.

  • 14. Shakour M., Salehi K., Kohan S., Shakour A. Investigating students attitudes and knowledge about surrogacy treatment, Iranien Journal of Obst and Gyn., 2012; 15(17): 8-16.

  • 15. Sharma BR. Forensic considerations of surrogacy – an overview, Journal of Clinical Forensic Medicine, 2006; 13: 80-85.

  • 16. Pennings G. Reproductive tourism as moral pluralism in motion J Med Ethics 2002;28:337-341 doi:10.1136/jme.28.6.337.

  • 17. Tieu MM. Altruistic surrogacy: the necessary objectification of surrogate mothers, J Med. Ethics, 2009; 35: 171-175.

OPEN ACCESS

Journal + Issues

Search