Outcomes of surrogacy undertaken by Australians overseas

Australian intended parents' decision-making and characteristics and outcomes of surrogacy arrangements completed in Australia and overseas

Markets for international surrogacy often arise in jurisdictions with limited regulations regarding assisted reproductive technologies. In some countries, like Australia, regulated domestic surrogacy services are often sidestepped for international providers. This study describes how Australian intended parents decide where to pursue surrogacy and compares the characteristics and outcomes of arrangements completed within and outside of Australia. The findings show that, although intended parents preferred undergoing surrogacy in Australia, perceiving the process as too long and complicated was a common reason to pursue an international arrangement. Multiple embryo transfer, anonymous gamete donation, and a lack of counselling were common in international surrogacy arrangements. When compared to surrogacy arrangements completed in Australia, where single embryo transfer is mandatory for surrogacy cycles, the rates of multiple birth, preterm birth and neonatal intensive care in international surrogacy were higher. These findings raise concerns about the health and welfare of international surrogacy participants, particularly the surrogates and children. In lieu of any international instrument regulating surrogacy, improving access to surrogacy at a domestic level would reduce the number of people engaging with international arrangements and in turn, reduce the potential for harm.

Patient and clinician experiences with cross-border reproductive care: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

This review analyzes the experiences of patients and clinicians with regards to international cross-border reproductive care (CBRC) for the purpose of conception.

METHODS

Electronic databases PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched using 'medical tourism' AND 'assisted reproductive technology' from 1978 to 2020.

RESULTS

Predominant patient motivators for CBRC were cost and legality of assisted reproduction technology (ART) in one's home country, followed by cultural factors like shared language, religion, and cultural familiarity. Clinicians suggested global laws for CBRC would reduce the potential for exploitation of vulnerable populations but believed the enactment of international regulations unlikely and, even if enacted, difficult to enforce.

CONCLUSIONS

While patient and clinician experiences with CBRC varied, patients frequently cited financial and legal reasons for pursuing CBRC, while many providers had concern for the patient's safety.

CLINICAL PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

This review recommends clinicians involved in family planning counsel patients seeking treatment abroad by: (i) informing patients of the risks and benefits of treatment abroad, (ii) establishing guidelines and standards for clinicians on resuming patient care post-CBRC, and (iii) creating a directory of reputable CBRC clinicians and experts.

Pregnancy and birth outcomes of single versus multiple embryo transfer in gestational surrogacy arrangements: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Multiple embryo transfer (MET) is associated with both an increased risk of multiple pregnancy and of live birth. In recent years, MET has become standard practice for most surrogacy arrangements. There is limited review of the use of MET versus single embryo transfer (SET) in surrogacy practice. The present review systematically evaluated the pregnancy outcomes of surrogacy arrangements between MET versus SET among gestational carriers. A systematic search of five computerized databases without restriction to the English language or study type was conducted to evaluate the primary outcomes: (i) clinical pregnancy; (ii) live delivery; and (iii) multiple delivery rates. The search returned 97 articles, five of which met the inclusion criteria. The results showed that clinical pregnancy (RR = 1.21, 95% CI: 1.06-1.39, n  =  5, I² = 41%), live delivery (RR = 1.29, 95% CI: 1.10-1.51, n  =  4, I² = 35%) and multiple delivery rates (RR = 1.42, 95% CI: 6.58-69.73, n  =  4, I² = 54%) were statistically significantly different in MET compared to SET. Adverse events including miscarriage, preterm birth and low birthweight were found following MET. Our findings support the existing evidence that MET results in multiple pregnancy and subsequently more adverse outcomes compared to SET. From a public health perspective, SET should be advocated as the preferred treatment for gestational carriers.

Globalised quests for assisted conception: Reproductive travel for infertility and involuntary childlessness

The global movement of people across international borders to undergo assisted reproductive treatment is common, although there is little accurate data. In this article, we synthesise findings from our own empirical research on reproductive travel in addition to a review of clinical, ethical, legal, and regulatory complexities from studies on reproductive travel since 2010. Motivations for travel include legal and religious prohibitions; resource considerations; lack of access to gametes and reproductive assistors; quality and safety concerns; and personal preferences. Higher risks to mothers and children are associated with multiple embryo transfer and subsequent multiple and higher order pregnancies and the average older age of women undertaking reproductive travel. The potential exploitation of other women as providers of oocytes or surrogacy services, the lack of equity in access to assisted reproduction and the ambiguous legal status of children conceived from international reproductive travel are important ethical considerations. A range of significant legal issues remain given variable and limited international regulation. Scholarship on this trade necessarily engages with issues of power and gender, social inequities, global capitalism and the private decision-making of individuals seeking to form families. Research gaps remain given recent changes in the organisation, demands and destinations of the trade.

Compensated transnational surrogacy in Australia: time for a comprehensive review

Commercial or compensated surrogacy involves providing payment for a woman to gestate a fetus to term and then hand over the child to commissioning parent(s). Compensated surrogacy is currently restricted by law or regulation in all Australian states and territories. New South Wales, Queensland and the Australian Capital Territory also restrict commissioning transnational compensated surrogacy, although there is evidence that this is not acting as a deterrent. Ethical issues arising in transnational compensated surrogacy include concerns relating to exploitation, commodification and welfare. The current status quo is unsatisfactory on legal, ethical and practical grounds. It is time to openly debate how Australia should balance the desire for childbearing through surrogacy with the limited domestic availability of women willing to act as surrogates.

Intended parents' motivations and information and support needs when seeking extraterritorial compensated surrogacy

Cross-border reproductive care (CBRC) is becoming increasingly common. Little is known about the motivations and information and support needs of people who cross borders to access surrogacy. This study aimed to explore: how those considering or undertaking extraterritorial surrogacy reach their decision; what other avenues they have considered and tried to have children; their sources of information and support; and perceptions of how others view their decision. Members of two Australian parenting support forums completed an anonymous online survey. Of the 249 respondents, 51% were gay men, 43% heterosexual women and 7% heterosexual men. Most heterosexual respondents had tried to conceive spontaneously and with assisted reproductive technology before considering surrogacy. Most respondents felt supported in their decision to try extraterritorial surrogacy by close family and friends. Surrogacy-related information was mostly sourced online and from other parents through surrogacy. Few sought information from a local general practitioner or IVF clinic and those who did reported IVF clinic staff were significantly (P < 0.001) more likely than other groups to communicate negative reactions to their decision to seek surrogacy. The apparent negative attitudes to cross-border surrogacy among health professionals warrants further research into health professionals' knowledge, beliefs and attitudes relating to surrogacy.