代理孕母要求最高法院停止對婦女和嬰兒的「剝削」
華盛頓郵報
Ariana Eunjung Cha阿麗亞娜·恩瓊查
2018年5月24日
梅麗莎·庫克的故事在2015年成為頭條新聞，當時她是懷著三胞胎的代理孕母。她說，委託爸爸要求她至少流產掉一個，因為他負擔不起三胞胎撫養費用。她拒絕了，並在法庭上爭取對孩子們的監護權。
庫克和另外兩位代孕母親——蓋爾·羅賓遜和托尼·巴雷——本月來到華盛頓，呼籲最高法院明確地闡明在這個有爭議的行業中，婦女和兒童的權利。這些婦女分別在不同的州提起訴訟，她們說代孕契約是剝削生母，代孕讓婦女成為孵蛋器，並使孩子商品化。
女律師哈羅德·卡西迪在接受採訪時說，代孕合同防止了「孩子被安置在符合孩子最大利益的地方。」
卡西迪說：「這令人吃驚和不安。」他說，許多下級法院把代孕這一複雜的問題，僅僅放在合同的執行。但是，當你處理孩子的生活時，「必須做出一些裁決」。
雖然美國最高法院不太可能受到新聞發佈會的影響，但各州的代孕法規雜亂無章，下級法院有時對代理孕母的親權做出相互矛盾的判決。專家表示，此類案件提出了需要解決的嚴重憲法問題。家庭研究理事會和美國親生命婦產科醫師協會等有影響力的團體敦促法院考慮這個問題。
庫克將她的旅程描述為「恐怖故事」。在一家機構，她同意用精子和女性捐贈者的卵子，為一名被稱為"C.M"的單身男子生一個孩子。然而，在她懷孕期間，她與他的互動使她質疑他照顧孩子的能力。三個孩子出生後被安置在他(單身男子)身邊。
C.M的妹妹提供的一份宣誓書稱他為「偏執狂」，容易「經常發怒」。她指責他與一位處理毒品的親戚合住一所房子，並說他不在屋內，讓孩子們長時間無人看管。
庫克已經就她的案件向最高法院遞交了訴狀。今年1月，她因美國第九巡迴上訴法院維持下級法院關於缺乏管轄權的裁決而敗訴，剝奪了她介入三胞胎狀況的能力。
庫克在周三新聞發佈會前發表的一份聲明中說：「當母親知道他們的孩子正在陷入不符合他們最大利益的境地，他們有權提出異議。」
據《人物》雜誌報導，C.M的一名律師說，這些孩子「正在取得驚人的表現，並且正在按計劃發展」，並說庫克檔案中的指控是「一堆謊言和虛假的陳述」。
巴雷第一次公開談論她的情況。她是愛荷華州的代理孕母，她試圖留住她代孕的孩子。她與保羅·蒙托弗簽訂了一份契約，以13,000美元的價格代孕一個用他的精子和捐卵製造的孩子。然而，她說，在她懷孕期間，她開始擔心蒙托弗和他的妻子。根據得報導，她指控蒙托弗稱她的丈夫，「一個骯髒的墨西哥人」和蒙托弗的妻子使用"n字"罵她。巴雷是非裔美國人。
今年2月，愛荷華州最高法院裁定蒙托弗是嬰兒的親生父親，並將擁有永久監護權。卡西迪律師說，她將在本周或下周向最高法院遞交請願書。
巴雷在一份聲明中說:「我在懷孕期間被委託父母虐待，包括受到醜陋、褻瀆的種族言論時，我有道義上的義務，不把代孕孩子安置在教導仇恨的家中。我不能允許這種情況發生」。
蒙托弗夫婦的律師辯稱，巴雷自願訂定合同，放棄她的親利。根據得梅因登記冊，這對夫婦聲稱巴雷的動機涉及金錢——她要求更多，並威脅說，如果蒙托弗一家不遵守，她就將孩子墮胎或收養。卡西迪向登記冊否認了這些指控。
蓋爾·羅賓遜在法庭上經歷了一個喜憂參半的結果。羅賓遜從捐卵和她哥哥丈夫的精子中孕育雙胞胎女孩，她說她被強迫加入協定，她尋求孩子的監護權。2009年，新澤西州一名法官裁定，儘管她與基因無關，但她是雙胞胎女孩的合法母親。2011年，另一名法官授予親生父親完全監護權，但保留了羅賓遜探視權。法官指出，兩個孩子都與親生父親和羅賓遜有聯繫，沒有質疑兩人的父母能力，但由於雙方之間的溝通破裂，聯合監護是不可能的。
Surrogate mothers ask Supreme Court to stop
‘exploitation’ of women and babies
By
Ariana Eunjung Cha
May 24, 2018
Melissa Cook's story became headline news in 2015 when she was carrying triplets as a surrogate. The intended dad asked her to abort at least one of them, she says, because he couldn't afford to raise them all. She refused and has been fighting for custody of the children in court ever since.
Cook and two other surrogate mothers — Gail Robinson and Toni Bare — came to Washington this month to call on the Supreme Court to provide more clarity on the rights of women and children in the controversial industry. The women, who have separately filed lawsuits in different states, say surrogacy contracts are exploitative to the birth mothers, create a class of women as breeders and commodify children.
The women's attorney, Harold Cassidy, said in an interview that the nature of surrogacy contracts prevents “a child being placed where it's in the child’s best interest.”
“It is surprising and disturbing,” Cassidy said. He said many lower courts have punted on the complex questions of surrogacy by making the issue simply about enforcing contracts. But when you are dealing with a child's life, “there are rulings that have to be made.”
While the U.S. Supreme Court is unlikely to be influenced by a news conference, there is a patchwork of statutes on surrogacy in different states and lower courts have returned sometimes conflicting verdicts on the parental rights of surrogates. Experts have said such cases raise critical constitutional issues that need to be addressed. Influential groups such as the Family Research Council and the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists have urged the court to consider the issue.
Cook has described her journey as a surrogate as a “horror story.” Through an agency, she had agreed to carry a child for a single man, known as “C.M.” in court filings, using his sperm and a female donor's egg. During her pregnancy, however, her interactions with him made her question his ability to care for the children. The three children were placed with him after they were born.
An affidavit provided by C.M.'s sister describes him as “paranoid” and prone to “frequent anger fits.” She accused him of sharing a house with a relative who deals drugs and said he has disappeared from the house and left the children unattended for hours.
Cook has filed a petition with the Supreme Court regarding her case. In January, she lost an appeal to adopt the three babies when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld a lower-court ruling that it lacked jurisdiction, denying her the ability to intervene in the triplets' situation.
“When a mother knows that their child is entering into a situation that is not in their best interests or, as in my case, downright detrimental to them, they have a right to object,” Cook said in a statement provided in advance of a news conference on Wednesday.
An attorney for C.M. said the children “are doing phenomenal and are developing on schedule,” according to People magazine, and said the accusations in Cook's filings are “a bunch of lies and false claims.”
Bare is speaking out publicly for the first time about her situation. She's a surrogate from Iowa who sought to keep the child she carried. She had entered into a contract with Paul Montover to carry a child created from his sperm and a donor egg, for $13,000. However, she said she became concerned about Montover and his wife during her pregnancy. According to the Des Moines Register, she accused Montover of calling her husband, who is of Hispanic origin, “a dirty Mexican” and Montover's wife of using the “n-word” to her. Bare, who was referred to as T.B. in court documents, is African American.
In February, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled that Montover is the baby's biological father and will have permanent custody. Cassidy said she would be filing a petition with the Supreme Court this week or next week.
“When I was abused throughout my pregnancy by the ‘intended’ parents, including being subjected to ugly, profanity-laced racial comments, I had a moral obligation to my daughter not to place her in a home that teaches hatred. I could not allow that to happen,” she said in a statement.
Attorneys for the Montovers have argued that Bare voluntarily entered into the contract, which terminated her parental rights. According to the Des Moines Register, the couple claimed "T.B.'s motivations involved money — that she pressed for more and threatened abortion or adoption if the Montovers didn't comply." Cassidy denied the allegations to the Register.
Gail Robinson experienced a more favorable, if mixed, outcome in court. Robinson, who carried twin girls from embryos created from donor eggs and her brother's husband's sperm, said she had been coerced into the agreement, and she sought custody of the children. In 2009, a New Jersey judge ruled that she is their legal mother despite the fact she is not genetically related. In 2011, another judge awarded full custody to the biological father but preserved Robinson's visitation rights as a parent. That judge noted that both children bonded with the biological father and Robinson and did not question either one's ability to parent, but according to NJ.com, said joint custody was not possible because communications had broken down between the parties.
Surrogate mothers ask Supreme Court to stop
‘exploitation’ of women and babies
內容所有權屬於LEGALIZE SURROGACY: WHY NOT?。本網站已取得中文獨家翻譯權
留言
張貼留言