L E G I S L A T I V

Accordingly, in our view, a regulatory approach that irrefutably ties the legal recognition of parentage with the circumstances of the surrogacy arrangement in which children have been conceived seems to both potentially discriminate against children based on the circumstances of their birth and provides no safeguards to protect the rights of surrogate birth parents, their partners and the intende. [...] While we support reasonable requirements which ensure that the wellbeing and interests of the surrogate, intended parents and the child are properly protected in the lead up to, during and after the surrogacy has been arranged, the issue of legal parentage should be centred on the best interests of the child. [...] SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS TO SUBSECTION 28G(2) We welcome proposed subsection 28G(2) of the Bill because it reflects the principle that a child should never be discriminated against because of the circumstances of their conception and that denying a child the legal recognition of their true parents for the rest of their life is not a child- centred approach to regulating surrogacy. [...] The best interests of the child are not currently the paramount consideration The requirement that the making of a parentage order be in the best interests of the child must be a paramount consideration, if it is to align with Australia’s international human rights obligations.4 Consistently with the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), it is possible to suggest to a court the considerations that should be. [...] We think this principle can be implemented by framing the requirement to consider whether it is reasonable in the circumstances to make the parentage order (s 28G(2)(e)) as a consideration made along the decision-making journey, where the final decision must ultimately be in the best interests of the child.