Over the decades, there have been numerous trends in the formation of family for those experiencing infertility. Adoption – initially domestic but now mostly international – has long been a prevailing method, with a dual outcome of also finding homes for parentless children. Those would-be parents with a stronger desire for genetic relatedness have turned to assisted reproductive technologies for the creation of their families. In the 21st century, capitalising on globalisation and advances in medical sciences and communication, global commercial surrogacy (GCS) is emerging as a dominant method of family formation. In seeking to publish this article in Adoption & Fostering, our primary objective was to provide its readership with an introductory look at GCS, thereby expanding an awareness of surrogacy to an audience whose work has traditionally been concerned with the care and protection of children through foster care and adoption. A secondary aim was to see where the long-standing field of adoption could potentially inform the burgeoning field of global commercial surrogacy. To achieve these objectives, we use international adoption and the adoption triangle as a framework, as we look at the similarities and differences between: (1) the adoptive and commissioning parents; (2) the birth mother and the surrogate; and (3) the adopted children and the children born of global surrogacy.
Achmad C (2014) International commercial surrogacy and children's rights: babies, borders, responsibilities and rights. Paper presented at the New Zealand Law Society conference, International Adoption and Surrogacy – Family formation in the 21st Century, April. Christchurch, Wellington and Auckland, New Zealand.
2.
AlvaradoSBRhoJLLambertSF (2014) Counseling families with emerging adult transracial and international adoptees. The Family Journal22(4): 402–408.
3.
AnleuS (1992) For love but not for money?Gender & Society6(1): 30–48.
4.
BishopLLoffB (2013) The rights of the gestational mother and child in surrogacy: a Bill to regulate surrogacy in India. Australian Journal of Adoption7(3): 1–8.
5.
BowieF (2007) Cultures of transnational adoption. Anthropological Quarterly80(2): 623–627.
6.
BrodzinskyDM (2005) Reconceptualizing openness in adoption: implications for theory, research, and practice. In: BrodzinskyDPalaciosJ (eds) Psychological Issues in Adoption: Research and practice, New York: Praeger Publishers, pp. 145–166.
7.
BromfieldNFRotabiKS (2014) Global surrogacy, exploitation, human rights and international private law: a pragmatic stance and policy recommendations. Global Social Welfare1(3): 123–135.
8.
CarpEW (2000) Family Matters: Secrecy and disclosure in the history of adoption, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
9.
CiccarelliJCBeckmanLJ (2005) Navigating rough waters: an overview of psychological aspects of surrogacy. Journal of Social Issues61(1): 21–43.
10.
CrawshawMBlythEvan den AkkerO (2013) The changing profile of surrogacy in the UK: implications for national and international policy and practice. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law34(3): 1–11.
11.
CreaTM (2012) Intercountry adoptions and home study assessments: the need for uniform practices. In: GibbonsJRotabiKS (eds) Intercountry Adoption: Policies, practices, and outcomes, Aldershot: Ashgate, pp. 265–272.
12.
CuthbertDFronekP (2014) Perfecting adoption? Reflections on the rise of commercial offshore surrogacy and family formation in Australia. In: Families, Policy and the Law, Australian Institute of Family Studies: Australian Government.
13.
Darnovsky M and Beeson D (2014) Global Surrogacy Practices, Report from the International Forum on Intercountry Adoption and Global Surrogacy, The Hague, 11–13 August 2014, The Hague: Institute of Social Studies Working Paper no. 601. Available at: http://repub.eur.nl/pub/77402/wp601.pdf.
14.
DasGuptaSDasguptaSD (2010) Motherhood jeopardized: reproductive technologies in Indian communities. In: ChavkinWMaherJM (eds) The Globalization of Motherhood, London: Routledge, pp. 131–153.
15.
DeomampoD (2013) Transnational surrogacy in India: interrogating power and women's agency. Frontiers: Journal of Women's Studies34(3): 167–188.
16.
Feere JD (2010). Birthright Citizenship in the United States: A global comparison. Center for Immigration Studies. Available at: http://cis.org/birthright-citizenship.
17.
FisherAP (2003) Still ‘not quite as good as having your own’? Toward a sociology of adoption. Annual Review of Sociology335–361.
18.
FronekPCuthbertD (2012) The future of inter-country adoption: a paradigm shift for this century. International Journal of Social Welfare21(2): 215–224.
19.
FuentesFBoéchatHNorthcottF (2012) Investigating the Grey Zones in Intercountry Adoption, Geneva, Switzerland: International Social Service.
20.
GolombokSMurrayCJadvaVMacCallumFLycettE (2004) Families created through surrogacy arrangements: parent–child relationships in the 1st year of life. Developmental Psychology40(3): 400–411.
21.
GolombokSMurrayCJadvaVLycettEMacCallumFRustJ (2006a) Non-genetic and non-gestational parenthood: consequences for parent–child relationships and the psychological well-being of mothers, fathers and children at age 3. Human Reproduction21(7): 1918–1924.
22.
GolombokSMacCallumFMurrayCLycettEJadvaV (2006b) Surrogacy families: parental functioning, parent–child relationships and children's psychological development at age 2. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry47(2): 213–222.
23.
GolombokSReadingsJBlakeLCaseyPMarksAJadvaV (2011) Families created through surrogacy: mother–child relationships and children's psychological adjustment at age 7. Developmental Psychology47(6): 1579–1588.
24.
GorisIHarringtonJKöhnS (2009) Statelessness: what it is and why it matters. Forced Migration Review32(6): 4–6.
25.
Goswami L, Rotabi KS and Bromfield NF (2014) Force, fraud, coercion and exploitation: abuses in intercountry adoption contrasted against what Indian women acting as surrogate mothers have to say about their experiences. Paper presented at the Forum on Intercountry Adoption and Global Surrogacy. The Hague, Netherlands, 11–13 August.
26.
GrotevantHDvon KorffL (2011) Adoptive identity. In: SchwartzSLuyckxKVignolesV (eds) Handbook of Identity Theory and Research, New York: Springer, pp. 585–601.
27.
Hague Conference on Private International Law (2012) A Preliminary Report on the Issues Arising from International Surrogacy Arrangements, The Hague: Permanent BureauAvailable at: www.hcch.net/upload/wop/gap2012pd10en.pdf.
28.
Hague Conference on Private International Law (2014a) The Desirability and Feasibility of Further Work on the Parentage/Surrogacy Project. Preliminary document 3b of March 2014 for the Council of April 2014 on General Affairs and Policy of the Conference. The Hague: HCCH. Available at: www.hcch.net/upload/wop/gap2014pd03b_en.pdf.
29.
Hague Conference on Private International Law (2014b) A study of legal parentage and the issues arising from international surrogacy arrangements. Preliminary Document No 3 C of March 2014 for the Council of April 2014 on General Affairs and Policy of the Conference. The Hague: HCIA. Available at: www.hcch.net/upload/wop/gap2014pd03c_en.pdf.
Henaghan M (2014). Future models for international surrogacy: proposals for change. Paper presented at the New Zealand Law Society conference, International Adoption and Surrogacy – Family formation in the 21st Century, April 2014. Christchurch, Wellington and Auckland, New Zealand.
32.
HenneySMAyers-LopezSMcRoyRGGrotevantHD (2007) Evolution and resolution: birth mothers' experience of grief and loss at different levels of adoption openness. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships24(6): 875–889.
International Social Service (2014) The adoption of older children: a project that measures up to the children's needs? (First part) ISS Monthly Review 181, May.
Jadva V, Blake L, Casey P and Golombok S (2012) Surrogacy families 10 years on: relationship with the surrogate, decisions over disclosure and children's understanding of their surrogacy origins. Human Reproduction, advance access, doi:10.1093/humrep/des273.
38.
JoyceK (2013) The Child Catchers: Rescue, trafficking, and the new Gospel of adoption, New York: Public Affairs.
39.
Karandikar S, Gezinski LB, Carter JR and Kalonga M (online first, January 2014) Economic necessity or noble cause? A qualitative study exploring motivations for gestational surrogacy in Gujarat, India. Affilia 29(2): 224–236.
40.
KennyPHigginsD (2014) Past adoption practices: key messages for service delivery responses and current policies. In: HayesAHigginsD (eds) Families, Policy and the Law: Selected essays on contemporary issues for Australia, Australian Institute of Family Studies.
41.
KroløkkeC (2012) From India with love: troublesome citizens of fertility travel. Cultural Politics8(2): 307–325.
42.
LimonC (2013) Surrogacy and parenthood: an overview of the research on the relationship between surrogacy and adoption. Australian Journal of Adoption7(3): 1–16.
MiscaG (2013) The ‘quiet migration’: challenges for parents of children adopted internationally. In: AbelaAWalkerJ (eds) Contemporary Issues in Family Studies: Global perspectives on partnerships, parenting and support in a changing world, Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 288–301.
46.
MiscaG (2014) The ‘quiet migration’: Is intercountry adoption a successful intervention in the lives of vulnerable children?Family Court Review52(1): 60–68.
47.
NeilE (2007) Coming to terms with the loss of a child: the feelings of birth parents and grandparents about adoption and post-adoption contact. Adoption Quarterly10(1): 1–23.
48.
PandeA (2009) Not ‘an angel’ not ‘a whore’: surrogates as ‘dirty workers’ in India. Indian Journal of Gender Studies16(2): 141–173.
49.
PandeA (2010) Surrogacy in India: manufacturing a perfect mother-worker. Signs35(4): 968–992.
50.
PandeA (2014) Wombs in Labor: Transnational commercial surrogacy in India, New York: Columbia University Press.
ReadingsJBlakeLCaseyPJadvaVGolombokS (2011) Secrecy, disclosure and everything in-between: decisions of parents of children conceived by donor insemination, egg donation and surrogacy. Reproductive Biomedicine Online22(5): 485–495.
Rotabi KS (2014) Force, Fraud, and Coercion: Bridging from knowledge in intercountry adoption to global surrogacy. Report for Thematic Area 4 of the International Forum on Intercountry Adoption and Global Surrogacy held in August 2014. International Institute of Social Sciences, The Hague, Netherlands. Available at: http://repub.eur.nl/pub/77403/wp600.pdf.
55.
RotabiKSBromfieldNF (2012) Intercountry adoption declines lead to new practices of global surrogacy in Guatemala: global human rights concerns in the context of violence and the era of advanced fertility technology. Affilia27(2): 129–141.
56.
RotabiKSBromfieldNFFronekP (2015) International private law to regulate commercial global surrogacy practices: Just what are social work's practical policy recommendations?International Social Work. . doi: 10.1177/0020872814564706.
SerafiniP (2001) Outcome and follow-up of children born after IVF–surrogacy. Human Reproduction Update7(1): 23–27.
64.
Sifris A (2014) Gay and lesbian parenting: the legislative response. In: Families, Policy and the Law. Australian Institute of Family Studies: Australian Government.
65.
SmolinDM (2004) Intercountry adoption as child trafficking. Valparaiso University Law Review39: 281–325.
66.
SparrowR (2006) Cloning, parenthood, and genetic relatedness. Bioethics20(6): 308–318.
WiddowsHMacCallumF (2002) Disparities in parenting criteria: an exploration of the issues, focusing on adoption and embryo donation. Journal of Medical Ethics28(3): 139–142.
74.
WileyMOLBadenAL (2005) Birth parents in adoption research, practice, and counseling psychology. The Counseling Psychologist33(1): 13–50.
75.
ZhangYLeeGR (2011) Intercountry versus transracial adoption: analysis of adoptive parents' motivations and preferences in adoption. Journal of Family Issues32(1): 75–98.
