A narrow but important victory of human dignity over the commercialization of the human body: a controversial document promoting the legalization of surrogacy, the so-called De Sutter Report, has been rejected by 16-15 votes in the Social and Health Committee of the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly (PACE).
The author of the controversial paper, Petra De Sutter, is a socialist politician from Belgium who is known as an LGBT activist and male-to-female transgender. Surrogacy is part of the LGBT agenda, because it is a way in which same-sex couples pretending to be “families” can cater for their desire to get hold of (other people’s) children. Although it advocated only the legalization of non-commercial surrogacy, the adoption of the controversial report would have been the first step on a slippery slope that would inevitably lead to the full legalization of surrogacy in all and any circumstances, and hence to a full-fledged trade in human flesh.
The fact that the task of drafting the report on surrogacy was assigned to Mr? De Sutter caused astonishment and scandal among observers of PACE, given that (s)he is him/herself, in his/her quality as the head of the Department for Gynaecology and Obstetrics at the University Hospital at Ghent, offering childbirth through surrogacy, which (s)he calls “altruistic” because the surrogate mothers (allegedly) receive no compensation. In doing so, (s)he is using a loophole in Belgian law, which, given that at the time of its adoption nobody could foresee the emergence of this practice, is silent on the matter.
It goes by itself that in cases of so-called “altruistic” surrogacy, thesurrogate mothers usually do get a compensation, while the medical practitioners charge high fees.
Those wishing to inform themselves about how persons engaging in the LGBT-lifestyle use surrogacy should read here.
Today’s victory, though important, will not be sufficient to stop the commercialization both of the female body and of children produced in vitro. What is urgently needed is an international convention that combats surrogacy tourism, e.g. by placing under criminal sanctions everyone who procures or offers the services of a surrogate mother, be it domestically or abroad. It is only through this principle of extraterritoriality that laws against surrogacy and trafficking can become effective. If such principle is suitable for the fight against child sex and child porn, then surely it can be applied to surrogacy as well.