LegalAspect and Legislative
TheCalifornia Supreme Court correctly interpreted the paternity issue ina way that was not influenced by gender. A man can claim fatherhooddespite that he does not bear a pregnancy, provided he donated thesperm that was used in the fertilization of the embryo (Johnson,2009).
Incase the court had ruled that a surrogate is a natural mother, thedecision would have decreased the number of people using ARTs inCalifornia since they would, after all, not have parental rights tochildren born using their genetic material. The decision encouragedmany people who could not successfully conceive naturally to engagethe services of surrogate mothers (Johnson, 2009).
Itis essential for the clinics to exercise the restrictions of AssistedReproductive Technologies to a certain group, for example, the gays.The clinics deserve having the power to deny some people the ARTservices since, say a child is born to gay parents, will be deprivedof the right to interact with the birth mother (Johnson, 2009).
Thespecial limitations result in legal concerns such as the doctorsfailing to offer IUI services to the gay community on allegationsthat their faith would not allow the action. Nonetheless, theclinics and the providers should be allowed to apply controls onpeople who receive the services based on issues such as disabilities.If the doctors determine that a surrogate is physically unfit tocarry a pregnancy to full term, they can refuse to offer the service(Johnson, 2009).
Itis true that the media was biased and assisted in verifying thecourt’s decision. The media could have influenced the court toarrive at that decision through asking for the public opinion, andthen weighing the responses of the majority. The courtrepresentatives could have, in turn, chosen to honor the preferencesof the majority. The means of arriving at a decision is appropriatesince it enhances the democracy of humans in the selection of socialservices that suits them best. Nonetheless, the process of speakingto the media about an ongoing case is inappropriate as the discussionheld could make the judge to make a prejudiced decision to meet theneeds of the majority of the public.
Ifthe defendants had declined to communicate with the media, the courtcould have reached an alternative decision. However, discussingmatters that are still pending in a court is against the law. Themajor impact of the media is offering people a platform to introduceliberal views on topical issues, which are likely to tamper with theautonomy if the judges (Julien & Uhlendorff, 2016).
Ifa constitutional rule that prohibits the surrogate mothers fromclaiming ownership of babies is passed today, it will enhance thenumber of people using the service. Nevertheless, numerous childlesscouples would seek the service if their surrogates would be obligedby the court to keep away from the infants once they are born(Johnson, 2009).
Furthermore,the existence of clear laws directing the requirements of embryotransplant, as well as education institutions specializing ontraining doctors in the profession would improve in a givenjurisdiction. Lastly, the government can enhance the development ofthe fertility industry in a particular area through offeringincentives such as zero taxation on the ART equipment and thephysicians’ remuneration (Johnson, 2009). This would help theprocedure to become affordable to many people.
Althoughthe laws in a given place could favor the application assistedreproduction technology, various factors such as cultural andreligious beliefs of the residents in a particular state may restrictthem from utilizing the technology. Christians, for instance, believethat God is the giver of life, and that people marry mainly forcompanionship hence, going to the extent of applying suchtechnologies to bear an offspring is against the will of God (Volf &Bass, 2013).
Fusco,S. (2008). North Coast Women`s Care Medical Group v. San DiegoSuperior Court. Supreme Court of California Resources. Retrieved on14 Dec. 2016, fromhttp://scocal.stanford.edu/opinion/north-coast-womens-care-medical-group-v-san-diego-superior-court-33046
Johnson,S. H. (2009). Healthlaw and bioethics: Cases in context.New York: Aspen Publishers/Wolters Kluwer.
Julien,A.B. & Uhlendorff, A. (2016). The impact of the media on courtdecisions. Instituteof Politics Publications.Retrieved fromhttp://www.ipp.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/n22-notesIPP-january2016.pdf
Volf,M., & Bass, D. C. (2013). Practicingtheology: Beliefs and practices in Christian life.Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans.