The European Parliament’s Conference of Presidents has rejected a proposal to prepare an INI report on surrogacy, thus turning down the baby-making industry’s newest attempt to “sanitize” the commercialization of wombs, semen, egg cells, and newborn children. Belgian surrogacy-entrepreneur De Sutter and his/her allies inside the EP are defeated once again.
Just four months after the defeat of the infamous “De Sutter Report” in the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly (PACE), and just two weeks after the ECtHR judgment in the case of Paradiso and Campanelli v. Italy, which confirmed that the fight against surrogacy and child trafficking are important policy objectives that justify even severe measures, a group of left-green-communist politicians are launching a new attempt to push for the legalization of surrogacy (and hence, child-trafficking). This time it takes the form of a non-legally-binding “initiative report” to be drafted by the European Parliament’s Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI), most possibly under the aegis of a socialist rapporteur. The EP’s Conference of Presidents will decide next week whether JURI will indeed be charge with drafting a report entitled “Cross border aspects regarding the legal status of children resulting from surrogacy procedures”. Continue reading
As we reported in one of our previous posts, the Committee for Social Affairs of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) rejected on 22 September the contoversial resolution drafted by Belgian MP Petra De Sutter, which would have opened a way for the legalization of surrogacy. However, one part of Mr? De Sutter’s draft, a recommandation to the Committee of Ministers of the organisation consider the desirability and feasibility of “drawing up European guidelines to safeguard children’s rights in relation to surrogacy arrangements”, survived this defeat, and was thus put to a vote in the PACE’s plenary session today. Readers of our website will be delighted to learn that this remnant has now also been defeated. The outcome of the vote was 83 against 77 votes, with 7 abstentions. Continue reading
The radical sexual left in Europe are very clever in pushing their controversial agenda. And when, every now and then, they are defeated, they are skilful in hiding their defeat from the eyes of the public.
This afternoon the Secretariat of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe issued a press release announcing the adoption by the Assembly’s Committee on Social Affairs of a Recommendation on surrogacy, drafted by the controversial Belgian politician Petra De Sutter. But what the secretariat discreetly omitted was that a far more ambitious draft Resolution by the very same Mr? De Sutter, which pretended to recommend the partial legalization of surrogacy, had been rejected by the same Committee. Continue reading
On 21 June, Dr. Petra De Sutter, a Belgian transgender senator and gynaecologist specialising in surrogacy and Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART), will try again to get the Committee on Social Affairs of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) to support the legalization of surrogacy, despite the rejection of his/her previous report in March and his/her clear conflict of interest.
The move flouts the values of the Council of Europe, both through the content of the motion and the pocedure through which it is promoted. Continue reading
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). Continue reading
“Reproductive medicine”, i.e. the production of babies in vitro for people who cannot have one (such as infertile couples, homosexual couples, or individual persons) is a big business that promises huge benefits for those involved in it. And quite obviously the baby-production industry has a big economic stake in ensuring that any legal obstacles for its activities to be removed, or, even better, in persuading lawmakers that these activities should be subsidized through public funding.
It is therefore self-evident that asking a “reproduction doctor” to be the rapporteur for a PACE resolution on surrogacy smacks of a conflict of interest. This is even more so if the person at question is not only a “reproduction doctor” (who happens to be the head of one among only 4 medical facilities in Belgium that offer surrogacy despite the absence of a legal framework for it), but also a well-known representative of the LGBT lobby, which seeks to create a legal entitlement for same-sex couples to get access to other people’s children. Continue reading