Abstract
Study question: What is the popularknowledge about the Surrogacy technique and its legal framework, the acceptance of the treatment, and the predisposition of women of reproductive age to become surrogate in Argentina? Summary answer: 72% of Argentinian women reported knowing about Surrogacy treatment and 80% showed a positive opinion about it. Despite this, 64% of those surveyed would not offer themselves as a candidate to be a surrogate. There is a marked lack of knowledge about the legal framework for GS treatments: approximately 3 out of every 4 women consulted do not know or give incorrect answers on the subject. What is already known: Assisted reproduction treatments have allowed the birth of more than 7 million children in the world, and surrogacy has largely contributed to these births, since it has been in use for more than three decades in several countries of the world1. Despite this, there is little research that investigates public perception of this reproductive practice. The heterogeneity in legal aspects worldwide promotes reproductive tourism looking for this treatment2, and Argentina is today an attractive destination for it. Study design: Cross-disciplinary descriptive. Materials and Methods: A structured and self-administered survey was carried out through OPINAIA (research consultancy) to a sample of 474 women from the general public, stratified by age and socioeconomic level. Main results: Although the percentage of knowledge and acceptance of the technique was high, the predisposition to be surrogate turned out to be very limited. The majority of those consulted would not be willing to be surrogate, the main reason was the emotional aspect. A marked lack of knowledge about the legal framework for GS treatments in Argentina was observed. Limitations: Descriptive, observational study. Wider implications of the findings: Education, information, advice and promotion of collective awareness regarding ART, particularly GS, would stimulate society to be more participatory, break down taboos and reduce fears about this treatment, promoting autonomy in taking of decisions. The greater availability of women who are candidates for pregnancy would overcome the main limitation of this treatment: the delay in finding the right candidate.
References
Perkins, et al. Trends and outcomes of gestational surrogacy in the United States. Fertil Steril. 2016;106:435-442.
Noelia Igareda Gonzalez, Ph.D. Legal and ethical issues in cross-border gestational surrogacy. Fertil Steril 2020;113:916–9.
Nicotra Perassi P, Nabel A, Moscoso G, Cerisola M. El imaginario sobre fertilidad y técnicas de reproducción asistida en la opinión pública argentina¨. Revista Reproducción. Volumen 35. Número II, 2020. ISSN 0327-9294.
Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Consideration of the gestational carrier: an Ethics Committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2018; 110:1017-21.
Consideration of the gestational carrier: a committee opinion. Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine; Fertil Steril 2013;99:1838–41.
Caldwell CE. Baby got back? Enforcing guardianship in International surrogacy agreements when tragedy strikes. Univ Memphis Law Rev 2019:847– 82.
Utian WH, Sheean L, Goldfarb JM, Kiwi R. Successful pregnancy after in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer from an infertile woman to a surrogate. N Engl J Med 1985;313:1351 –1352.
Perkins, K. M., S. L. Boulet, D. J. Jamieson, and D. M. Kissin. 2016. “Trends and Outcomes of Gestational Surrogacy in the United States.” Fertility and Sterility 106: 435–42.e2.
Shetty, P. 2012. “India’s Unregulated Surrogacy Industry.” Lancet 380: 1633–34.
So¨derstro¨m-Anttila, V., U.-B. Wennerholm, A. Loft, A. Pinborg, K. Aittoma¨ki, L. B. Romundstad, and C. Bergh. 2016. “Surrogacy: Outcomes for Surrogate Mothers, Children and the Resulting Families—A Systematic Review.” Human Reproduction Update 22: 260–76.
Deomampo, D. 2015. “Defining Parents, Making Citizens: Nationality and Citizenship in Transnational Surrogacy.” Medical Anthropology 34: 210–25.
