A bill to set the ground rules for contracts between gestational carriers and intended parents passed the Minnesota House last Monday, but only after issues such as abortion and gay adoption made their way into a debate that was dominated by Republicans.
Couples who cannot have biological children and have exhausted adoption resources occasionally turn to surrogate mothers to carry their children to term. Many times, those pregnancies gestate embryos that are the product of genetic materials from at least one of the intended parents. About 100 such arrangements are made in Minnesota each year and there currently are no laws that govern such complicated and important contracts and procedures.
On April 19, Jenny Fortwengler of Waite Park, Minn., gave birth as a surrogate mother, an experience she said was a very life-affirming. "[The doctor] was about to put the baby on my stomach when I pointed to the couple. "It's their baby,' I said. When I saw them holding the baby, I started crying. I thought to myself that this was amazing, and everything that I had hoped it would be," she said. "[After the birth], I knew right away that I wanted to go again... There are a lot of couples and singles out there who need surrogates. I know that I can do this for them, and that it gives me immense personal satisfaction."
The bill, authored by Rep. Kathy Tinglestad, R-Andover, would specify the rights and responsibilities that intended parents have when they contract with a woman to carry their child and make the surrogate process easier and more transparent. The surrogate must be over 21, must have a mental health evaluation, both parties must have separate and independent legal counsel and the surrogate must be appropriately compensated. The surrogate mother must have also given birth at least once previous to signing a surrogacy contract.
But when reproductive health is the topic of discussion, social conservatives and the religious right often find some way to stir up emotions. The Minnesota Family Council has been very vocal in opposition to the bill. "The legislation constitutes legalized baby-selling and raises the specter of the state encouraging the new eugenics -- designer babies," a group representative wrote on the Web site. And of course, the Family Council found a way to make an issue out of gay marriage. "The state is facilitating and encouraging more children raised without both a mother and father, e.g. more single parent, cohabiting opposite- and same-sex parent households ... Cohabiting and lesbian partners of parties to these agreements are given parental rights."
Officials of the Minnesota Catholic Conference have expressed that they believe the Church would not approve of a bill providing guidelines for surrogacy. "Donation of semen or ova and the use of surrogate motherhood to bear children are contrary to the unity of marriage and the dignity of the procreation of the human person," the group said in a letter to Gov. Tim Pawlenty. "While we sympathize with childless couples who are desperate to have children, the ends do not justify the means. We hope that government will not attempt to redefine the natural state of marriage and human procreation."
As the bill was debated in the House, several Republicans attempted to ban abortion by amending the bill. Rep. Dan Severson introduced such an amendment, but bill backer Rep. Steve Simon, DFL, told legislators it wasn't necessary. "[Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life] is neutral on this bill. I hope we don't go down the path of making this about abortion," he said. Despite that, a number of Republicans spoke in support of an abortion ban in the bill. Severson said, "You're going to have rich people who are going to jump into this game and they are going to want a basketball team of boys and a swim team of girls. Who is advocating for the children? Who is advocating for the unborn?"
Tom Emmer, R-Delano, offered an amendment to replace the term "parents" with the term "mother and father," a veiled effort to prevent gays, lesbians and unmarried couples from using a surrogate mother. "The whole purpose behind this legislation is people, husbands and wives who are not able to conceive children," said Emmer. Tinglestad, who authored the bill, said, "In adoption, we don't require that the intended parents be married or be a mother and father."
Rep. Karen Clark, DFL-Minneapolis, one of only three openly gay or lesbian members of the legislature called Emmer out on his attempt at discrimination. "Are you trying to prevent a certain group of people from using this opportunity, this resource, and if so, who?" said Clark. Emmer said he wasn't. The amendment didn't pass.
After an hour of lively debate, the bill passed the House 86-46. Pawlenty has not signaled whether or not he supports the bill.
