Research Article


DOI :10.26650/ppil.2019.39.1.0065   IUP :10.26650/ppil.2019.39.1.0065    Full Text (PDF)

A Difficult Turning Point in Family Law: The Current Developments on Surrogate Motherhood with a Comparative Law Perspective

Şafak Parlak Börü

Surrogate motherhood has become one of the most interesting and complicated issues of family law in both domestic law and private international law. The verity of the ‘mater semper certa est’ principle of Roman law has started to feel the effects of the development of new reproduction techniques. The different national legal provisions and applications have become the reason for the rise of (international) surrogacy tourism. It can now be seen that the once rigid approach of European countries in this area has softened since the decisions of the ECHR in Mennesson and Labassee. The subject is partly regulated in Turkish law while the practice of surrogate motherhood is prohibited. In our study, we attempted to deal with the subject matter according to different aspects - in terms of comparative law and recent decisions of the ECHR. Thus, we wish to make a contribution to the discussion and potential legal framing and harmonization in Turkish law.

DOI :10.26650/ppil.2019.39.1.0065   IUP :10.26650/ppil.2019.39.1.0065    Full Text (PDF)

Aile Hukukunda Zor Bir Dönemeç: Karşılaştırmalı Hukuk Bakış Açısıyla Taşıyıcı Anneliğe İlişkin Güncel Gelişmeler

Şafak Parlak Börü

Taşıyıcı annelik gerek devletlerin iç hukuklarında gerekse uluslararası hukuk çerçevesinde aile hukukunun en ilginç ve karmaşık konularından biri haline gelmiştir. Roma hukukundan günümüze gelen ‘mater semper certa est’ (‘Anne her zaman bellidir’) prensibinin genelgeçer kesinliği modern üreme tekniklerinin ilerlemesiyle birlikte sarsılmaya başlamıştır. Devletler arasındaki yasal düzenleme ve uygulama farklılıkları taşıyıcı annelik turizminin doğmasına sebep olmuştur. Avrupa ülkelerinde taşıyıcı anneliğe ilişkin katı tutumun özellikle AİHM’in Mennesson ve Labassee davalarında vermiş olduğu kararların ardından yumuşamaya başladığı görülmektedir. Türk hukukunda ise konunun kısmen ele alındığı ve uygulamanın yasak kabul edildiği görülmektedir. Çalışmamızda konuyu farklı yönleriyle, karşılaştırmalı hukuk düzenlemeleri ve AİHM kararları çerçevesinde ayrıntılı şekilde ele almaya çalıştık. Böylece dünyada konuya ilişkin güncel gelişmeler ışığında, Türk hukukunda konuya ilişkin bakış açısına ve yapılacak değerlendirmelere katkı sağlamayı diliyoruz.


EXTENDED ABSTRACT


Surrogate motherhood has become one of the most interesting and complicated issues of family law in domestic laws as well as in private international law. The wellaccepted certainty of the ‘mater semper certa est’ principle of Roman law has started to lose potency with the development of new reproduction techniques. The different national legal provisions and applications have become the reason for the rise of international surrogacy tourism. It has been observed that the once rigid approach of European countries in this matter has become softer following the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Mennesson and Labassee. The subject in Turkish law is partly regulated and the practice of surrogate motherhood is prohibited. In our study, we attempted to approach the subject from different perspectives in terms of comparative law and recent ECHR decisions. In this way, we wish to make a contribution to the discussion and potential legal framing and harmonization in Turkish law. Surrogate motherhood has recently turned into a global operation because couples who face legal prohibition of surrogacy in their own countries head towards those countries which allow the process. Nonetheless, this process does not function smoothly especially because of the associated legal and ethical problems. Moreover, the legal problems of transnational surrogate motherhood, issues such as the legal validity of the conditions of the surrogacy agreement, the parties to the agreement, the rights and obligations of the parties in case of breach of contract, the legal and ethical nature of the contract, and the parentage issues are the main topics for discussion. Cases regarding surrogate motherhood initially started to engage public attention in the 1980s. The legal cases ‘Baby Cotton’ (Britain) and ‘Baby M’ (USA) have had serious repercussions across the world and have brought forth the legal and ethical issues regarding the process. The current and famous international cases such as ‘Baby Donna’ (Belgium), ‘Baby Manji’ and ‘Balaz Twins’ (India), ‘Baby Gammy’ (Australia-Thailand) have followed these cases. National legislators are now faced with this new and interesting element in family law, confirming that the practice of surrogate motherhood is steadily increasing. In comparative law, countries may be divided into three categories according to their legal policies on surrogate motherhood: 1. Those countries known as ‘import countries’ in the doctrine because that they do not currently allow surrogate motherhood in their domestic law. Germany, Switzerland, France, Austria, Italy, Spain and Turkey are in this first category. 2. Those countries where no legal regulations regarding surrogate motherhood exist or where the process is allowed in domestic law under strict conditions and supervision provided that the willing couples are entitled to nationality or permanent residence e.g. Belgium, Holland, New Zealand, Brazil. 3. The third group is referred to as export countries, including certain states in the United States (e.g. California), Russia, Ukraine, Israel, India and Greece. These countries accept both transnational and domestic surrogacy. Those countries belonging to categories I. and II. have long refused parental authority for willing couples of babies who were already born in countries which allow surrogate motherhood based on the grounds of ‘contradiction to public policy’, ‘fraud against law’ or incompleteness of other requirements. Nonetheless, it is possible to say that the rigid approach of European countries in this area has softened since the EHCR decisions in Mennesson and Labassee case. In Turkey, there was no specific legal regulation (in terms of ‘code’) for a long time regarding having a child by assisted reproductive technologies and surrogate motherhood – although the legal aspect of the subject was partly regulated by a by-law. Evaluating the legislation of the foreign countries that have prohibited the surrogacy, it was truthfully criticized in the doctrine that such a legal prohibition of surrogate motherhood should have been set forward rather by the will of legislator, but not the administration. Finally, there have been amendments to Law 2238 on the Harvesting, Storage, Grafting, and Transplantation of Organs and Tissues, by Law 7151 on the Amendment of Certain Laws and Decree Laws enacted in Official Gazette 30616 dated 05.12.2018. Accordingly, surrogate motherhood is legally prohibited by power of these amendments. (Non-commercial) Surrogate motherhood should also be accepted as a legal possibility de lege ferenda and should be the subject of an extensive and detailed legal arrangement and supervision as it is the case in Israel, in case there is no other medical choice left. It is possible that surrogacy can come to be a useful alternative solution, provided that the arrangements aiming at the protection of the child and the parties to the application are carried out under strict supervision. As evidenced by the increasing number of cases of surrogate motherhood, disregarding what the science of medicine provides and, moreover, legal prohibition of its practice is not a long-term solution. Since the surrogate motherhood agreement is a private law contract, it will be more appropriate to allow the implementation of this application in the event that no one can be forced to become a party to the contract. Furthermore, the application is considered as a last resort when the usefulness of the application is taken into consideration and the other means are officially depleted. Hence, we believe that the legal arrangements should be made to facilitate the establishment of paternity with the willing father and mother. In the face of medical developments in reproductive methods, the silence or prohibition of the law will violate the rights of individual/families to have children and their rights to reproduction. We would like to express that surrogacy has been prohibited not just because of the ethical aspects of the subject matter, but also the legislator may probably have thought of avoiding the problems to be occurred in the practice.


PDF View

References

  • Acabey M.B, Soybağı (Kurulması, Genel Olarak Sonuçları, Özellikle Evlilik Dışında Doğan Çocukların Mirasçılığı) (Güncel Hukuk Yayınları 2002). google scholar
  • Aebi-Müller R und Dörr B, ‘Künstliche Fortpflanzung im schweizerischen Recht’ in A Dutta, D Schwab, D Henrich, P Gottwald und Martin Löhnig (Hrsg), Künstliche Fortpflanzung und europaeisches Familienrecht (Gieseking 2015) google scholar
  • Baygın C, Soybağı Hukuku, (On İki Levha 2010). google scholar
  • Baygın C, ‘Kan Bağına Dayanan Soybağı’ [2002] 6 Atatürk Üniversitesi Erzincan Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 255. google scholar
  • Baysal B, ‘Çocuğun Kökenini Öğrenme Hakkı’, Prof.Dr. Rona Serozan’a Armağan, C.I, (On İki Levha 2010) 493. google scholar
  • Beck-Gernsheim E, ‘Kinderwunsch Ohne Grenzen?- Globalisierte Fortpflanzungsmedizin und neue Formen der Elternschaft’ in G Maio, T Eichinger und C Bozzaro (Hrsg.), Kinderwunsch und Reproduktionsmedizin-Ethische Herausforderungen der technisierten Fortpflanzung (Karl Alber 2013). google scholar
  • Benöhr-Laqueur S, ‘Leihmutterschaft und Kindesverkauf via Internet: Der Fall ‘Baby Donna’ (2009) Die Hebamme, 84. google scholar
  • Bernat E, ‘Anmerkung zu der Entscheidung des Österreichischen Verfassungsgerichtshofs vom 14.12.2011’ (2012) Recht der Medizin 107. google scholar
  • Bertschi N, Leihmutterschaft- Theorien, Praxis und rechtliche Perspektiven in der Schweiz, den USA und Indien (Stämpfli 2014). google scholar
  • Boele-Woelki K, ‘Ersatzmutterschaft und ‘kalter Ausschluss’ im Vermögensrecht von Ehegatten und nichtehelichen Partnern in den Niederlanden’, (2011) Zeitschrift für das gesamte Familienrecht, 1455. google scholar
  • Boele-Woelki K, Curry-Sumner I, Schrama W and Vonk M, ’Draagmoederschap en illegal opneming van kinderen’, (Çalışmanın ingilizce özet metni) <https://www.wodc.nl/binaries/1945summary_tcm28-71388.pdf> accessed 8 August 2018. google scholar
  • Bokelmann V und Bokelmann M, Zur Lage der für andere übernommenen Mutterschaft in Deutschland, Rechtsvergleich mit Reformvorschlägen (Peter Lang 2003). google scholar
  • Dethloff N, ‘Leihmutterschaft in rechtsvergleichender Perspektive’ in Beate Ditzen und MarcPhilippe Weller (Hrsg), Regulierung der Leihmutterschaft (Mohr Siebeck 2018) . google scholar
  • Diurni A, ‘Künstliche Fortpflanzung im italienischen Recht’ in Anatol Dutta, Dieter Schwab, Dieter Henrich, Peter Gottwald und Martin Löhnig (Hrsg), Künstliche Fortpflanzung und europaeisches Familienrecht (Gieseking 2015). google scholar
  • Druzenko G, ‘Ukraine’ in Katarina Trimmings and Paul Beaumont (eds), International Surrogacy Agreements, Legal Regulation at the International Level (Hart Publishing 2013). google scholar
  • Duden K, ‘Leihmutterschaften’, (2013) Abschlussveranstaltung der Jahresfachtagung des Bundesverbandes der Deutschen Standesbeamtinnen und Standesbeamten, IPRax 196. google scholar
  • Dutta A, ‘Künstliche Fortpflanzung in ‘Anbieterrechtsordnungen’-Ein Blick über Europa hinaus’ in Anatol Dutta, Dieter Schwab, Dieter Henrich, Peter Gottwald und Martin Löhnig (Hrsg), Künstliche Fortpflanzung und europaeisches Familienrecht (Gieseking 2015). google scholar
  • Ekşi N, ‘Mahkeme Kararlarında Sınıraşan Taşıyıcı Anneliğe İlişkin Hukuki Sorunlar’, [2016] 36 Milletlerarası Hukuk ve Milletlerarası Özel Hukuk Bülteni 1. google scholar
  • Engel M, ‘Internationale Leihmutterschaft und Kindeswohl’ (2014) Zeitschrift für europäisches Privatrecht, 538. google scholar
  • Engelhardt L, ‘Die Leihmutterschaft im US-amerikanischen Recht am Beispiel von Kalifornien und New Hampshire’ in Beate Ditzen/Marc-Philippe Weller (Hrsg), Regulierung der Leihmutterschaft (Mohr Siebeck 2018). google scholar
  • Erişgin Söğütlü Ö ve Koçhisarlıoğlu C, ‘Taşıyıcı Annelik, Ortaya Çıkaracağı Hukuksal Sorunlar ve Çözüm Önerileri’, 4.Uluslararası Toplumsal Cinsiyet Çalışmaları Konferansı: Toplumsal Cinsiyet Eşitliği ve Hukuk, Konferans Bildiri Kitabı C.2 (Doğu Akdeniz Üniversitesi Yayınları 2013) 285. google scholar
  • Erol Y, Yapay Döllenme Yöntemleri ve Taşıyıcı Annelik, (Yetkin 2012).Parlak Börü / Aile Hukukunda Zor Bir Dönemeç: Karşılaştırmalı Hukuk Bakış Açısıyla Taşıyıcı Anneliğe İlişkin Güncel Gelişmeler 45 google scholar
  • European Parliament Directorate-General for Internal Policies-(Laurence Brunet, Derek King, Janeen Carruthers, Claire Marzo, Konstantina Davaki and Julie McCandles) ‘A Comparative Study on the Regime of Surrogacy in EU Member States’, <http://www.europarl.europa.eu/ RegData/etudes/STUD/2013/474403/IPOL-JURI_ET(2013)474403_EN.pdf > accessed 8 June 2018. google scholar
  • Ferrand F und Francoz-Terminal L, ‘Neueste Entwicklungen im französischen Familienrecht 20112012’, (2012) FamRZ 1437. google scholar
  • Ferrari S, ‘Künstliche Fortpflanzung im österreichischen Recht’ in Anatol Dutta, Dieter Schwab, Dieter Henrich, Peter Gottwald und Martin Löhnig (Hrsg), Künstliche Fortpflanzung und europaeisches Familienrecht (Gieseking 2015). google scholar
  • Ferrer I Riba J, ‘Künstliche Fortpflanzung im spanischen Recht’ in Anatol Dutta, Dieter Schwab, Dieter Henrich, Peter Gottwald und Martin Löhnig (Hrsg), Künstliche Fortpflanzung und europaeisches Familienrecht (Gieseking 2015). google scholar
  • Fulli-Lemaire S, ‘International Surrogate Motherhood before the French Cour de Cassation-The Door is now Ajar’ (2017) 2 Zeitschrift für Europäisches Privatrecht 471. google scholar
  • Gassner U, Kersten J, Krüger M, Lindner JF, Rosenau H und Schroth U, Fortpflanzungsmedizingesetz Augsburg-Münchner-Entwurf (AME-FMedG) (Mohr Siebeck 2013). google scholar
  • Gerecke M und Valentin J M, ‘Kinder auf Bestellung- ‘Geliehene Mütter’ und ihre rechtliche Behandlung im europaeischen Vergleich’ in Andreas Hoyer und Hans Hattenhauer (Hrsg), Gedaechtnisschrift für Jörn Eckert (Nomos 2008). google scholar
  • Goeldel A, Leihmutterschaft-eine rechtsvergleichende Studie (Peter Lang 1994). google scholar
  • Gönenç F İ, ‘Yardımcı Üreme Tekniklerinde Hukuki Sorunlar’, Uluslararası Sağlık Hukuku Sempozyumu (Türkiye Barolar Birliği Yayınları 2014) 63. google scholar
  • Hague Conference on Private International Law ‘A Study of Legal Parentage and The Issues Arising From International Surrogacy Arrangements’ (Prel.Doc. No 3C for the 2014 Council). google scholar
  • Hague Conference on Private International Law ‘A Preliminary Report on the Issues Arising from International Surrogacy Arrangements (Prel.Doc. No:10 for the 2012 Council). google scholar
  • Helms T, ‘Reproduktionsmedizin und Abstammungsrecht: Hat Deutschland die international Entwicklung verpasst?’, (2015) google scholar
  • Forum Familien- und Erbrecht 234. google scholar
  • Hatemi H, Hukuka ve Ahlaka Aykırılık Kavramı ve Sonuçları, (Gözden Geçirilmiş Doçentlik Tezi) (İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları 1976). google scholar
  • Henrich D, ‘Das Kind mit zwei Müttern (und zwei Vätern) im internationalen Privatrecht’ in Sybille Hofer, Diethelm Klippel und Ute Walter (Hrsg), Perspektiven des Familienrechts, Festschrift für Dieter Schwab zum 70.Geburtstag (Gieseking 2005). google scholar
  • Hoksbergen R A.C und Lange G, ‘Perspektiven für Adoptivkinder in Europa und in den Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika’ (2013) Zeitschrift für Jugendhilfe und Familienrecht 494. google scholar
  • Ikemoto L C, ‘Reproductive Tourism: Equality Concerns in the Global Market for Fertility Services’ (2009) 27 Law and Inequality: A Journal of Theory and Practice 277. google scholar
  • Kalkan Oğuztürk B, Türk Medeni Hukukunda Biyoetik Sorunlar (Vedat 2011). google scholar
  • Khazova O, ‘Russia’ in Katarina Trimmings and Paul Beaumont (eds), International Surrogacy Agreements, Legal Regulation at the International Level (Hart Publishing 2013). Kırkbeşoğlu N, Soybağı Alanında Biyoetik ve Hukuk Sorunları (Vedat 2006). google scholar
  • Lagarde P, ‘Anmerkung zu der Entscheidung der Cour de Cassation vom 17.12.2008’, (2009) RCDIP 320. google scholar
  • Lammers R, Leihmutterschaft in Deutschland: Rechtfertigen die Menschenwürde und das Kindeswohl ein striktes Verbot? (PL Academic Research 2017). google scholar
  • Lederer N, Grenzenloser Kinderwunsch, Leihmutterschaft im nationalen, europaischen und globalen rechtlichen Spannungsfeld (Peter Lang 2016). google scholar
  • Mayer C, ‘Ordre public und Anerkennung der rechtlichen Elternschaft in internationalen Leihmutterschaftsfällen’, (2014) 78 Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht 551. google scholar
  • Metin S, ‘Yörüngesinden Çıkan Tabiat: Etik, Sosyal, Psikolojik ve Hukuki Görünümleriyle Taşıyıcı Annelik’ (2012) İstanbul Barosu Dergisi: Sağlık Hukuku Makaleleri-II, İstanbul Barosu Yayınları 7. google scholar
  • Monéger F, ‘France: Biological and social parentage’ in Katharina Boele-Woelki, Nina Dethloff and Werner Gephart (eds), Family Law and Culture in Europe-Developments, Challenges and Opportunites (Intersentia 2014). google scholar
  • Mortazavi S, ‘It Takes a Village To Make a Child: Creating Guidelines for International Surrogacy’, (2012) 100 The Georgetown Law Journal 2249. google scholar
  • Müller F, ‘Das Geschäft mit den Babys’, Weltwoche Nr.4.11 < https://www.weltwoche.ch/ ausgaben/2011-4/artikel/das-geschaeft-mit-den-babys-die-weltwoche-ausgabe-42011.html > accessed 8 August 2018. google scholar
  • Najar N, ‘India Wants to Ban Birth Surrogacy for Foreigners’, (The New York Times, 28.10.2015), <https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/29/world/asia/india-wants-to-ban-birth-surrogacy-forforeigners.html> accessed 8 August 2018. google scholar
  • Nomer H, ‘Suni Döllenme Dolayısıyla Ortaya Çıkabilecek Nesep Problemleri’, Prof.Dr.Kemal Oğuzman’ın Anısına Armağan (Beta 2000) 545. google scholar
  • Nicholls QC M, ‘Legal Problems with International Surrogacy Arrangements’, (21.10.2013), <https://www.rtc.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Legal-Problems-With-InternationalSurrogacy-Arrangements.pdf > accessed 8 June 2018. google scholar
  • Nishitani Y, ‘Aktuelle Entwicklungen im internationalen Familienrecht Japans’, (2017) 22 43 Zeitschrift für Japanisches Recht 21. google scholar
  • Nitschmann K und Petersdorf B, ‘’Ersatzmutterschaft-Eine Herausforderung für das Strafrecht?’ in Heinz Müller-Dietz, Egon Müller, Karl Ludwig Kunz, Henning Radtke, Guido Britz, Carsten Momsen und Heinz Koriath (Hrsg), Festschrift für Heike Jung zum 65.Geburtstag (Nomos 2007). google scholar
  • Oberhuber N, ‘Das Geschäft mit der guten Hoffnung’, (DIE ZEIT, 17.08.2014) <https://www.zeit. de/wirtschaft/2014-08/leihmutter-kinder-schangerschaft > accessed 8 June 2018. google scholar
  • Orejudo Prieto De Los Mozos P, ‘Recognition in Spain of Parentage Created by Surrogate Motherhood’, (2012) 12 Yearbook of Private International Law 619 (Spain). google scholar
  • Orejudo Prieto De Los Mozos P, ‘Spain’ in Katarina Trimmings and Paul Beaumont (eds), International Surrogacy Agreements, Legal Regulation at the International Level (Hart Publishing 2013). google scholar
  • Özdemir H, ‘Yapay Döllenme ve Soybağı’, Prof.Dr.Mustafa Dural’a Armağan (Filiz 2013) 875. Oktay Özdemir S ve Tek G S, Türk Hukukunda Tıp Bilimindeki Gelişmelerin Soybağına Etkileri’, Prof.Dr.Mustafa Dural’a Armağan (Filiz 2013) 909. Parlak Börü / Aile Hukukunda Zor Bir Dönemeç: Karşılaştırmalı Hukuk Bakış Açısıyla Taşıyıcı Anneliğe İlişkin Güncel Gelişmeler 47 Perreau-Saussine L and Sauvage N, ‘France’ in Katarina Trimmings and Paul Beaumont (eds), International Surrogacy Agreements, Legal Regulation at the International Level (Hart Publishing 2013). google scholar
  • Pintens W, ‘Künstliche Fortpflanzung im belgischen und französischen Recht’ in Anatol Dutta, Dieter Schwab, Dieter Henrich, Peter Gottwald und Martin Löhnig (Hrsg), Künstliche Fortpflanzung und europaeisches Familienrecht (Gieseking 2015). google scholar
  • Preliminary Report on the Issues Arising from International Surrogacy Arrangements, (Permanent Bureau of the Hague Conference on Private International Law, Pre.Doc.No.10 of March 2012, <https://assets.hcch.net/docs/d4ff8ecd-f747-46da-86c3-61074e9b17fe.pdf > accessed 4 August 2018. google scholar
  • Reinhardt J, ‘Aktuelle Herausforderungen in der Praxis der Adoptionsvermittlung’ (2013) Zeitschrift für Jugendhilfe und Familienrecht 499. google scholar
  • Retassie R, ‘Israel: biological mother recognised as parent in landmark surrogacy decision’ (12.03.2012), <https://www.bionews.org.uk/page_93480 > accessed 8 August 2018. google scholar
  • Reuß P M, ‘Künstliche Fortpflanzung im niederländischen Recht’ in Anatol Dutta, Dieter Schwab, Dieter Henrich, Peter Gottwald und Martin Löhnig (Hrsg), Künstliche Fortpflanzung und europaeisches Familienrecht (Gieseking 2015). google scholar
  • Rokas KA, ‘Greece’ in Katarina Trimmings and Paul Beaumont (eds), International Surrogacy Agreements, Legal Regulation at the International Level (Hart Publishing 2013). google scholar
  • Scherpe J, ‘Elternschaft im Vereinigten Königreich nach dem Human Fertilisation und Embryology Act 2008’ (2010) Zeitschrift für das gesamte Familienrecht 1513. google scholar
  • Scherpe J, ‘Künstliche Fortpflanzung im Recht von England und Wales’ in Anatol Dutta, Dieter Schwab, Dieter Henrich, Peter Gottwald und Martin Löhnig (Hrsg), Künstliche Fortpflanzung und europaeisches Familienrecht (Gieseking 2015). google scholar
  • Schuz R, ‘Surrogacy in Israel: An Analyses of The Law in Practice’ in Rachel Cook, Shelley Day Sclater and Felicity Kaganas (eds), Surrogate Motherhood: International Perspectives (Hart 2003). Serozan R, Çocuk Hukuku (Vedat Genişletilmiş İkinci Basıdan Tıpkı Bası 2017). google scholar
  • Sert S, ‘Yapay Döllenme ve Taşıyıcı Anneliğe İlişkin Hukuksal Düzenlemeler’ (2014) Legal Hukuk Dergisi Özel Sayı- Akademik Yaşamının 55.Yılı Onuruna Rona Aybay’a Armağan (2.Cilt) 2013. google scholar
  • Shakargy S, ‘Israel’ in Katarina Trimmings and Paul Beaumont (eds), International Surrogacy Agreements, Legal Regulation at the International Level (Hart Publishing 2013). google scholar
  • Sitter SC, Grenzüberschreitende Leihmutterschaft, Eine Untersuchung des materiellen und internationalen Abstammungsrechts Deutschlands und der USA (Duncker&Humblot 2017). google scholar
  • Snyder SH, ‘United States of America’ in Katarina Trimmings and Paul Beaumont (eds), International Surrogacy Agreements, Legal Regulation at the International Level (Hart Publishing 2013). google scholar
  • Strassmann B, ‘Leihmutterschaft-Bauch zu vermieten’ (Die Zeit, Nr.48/2012), <https://www.zeit. de/2012/48/Leihmutterschaft-Gesetzgebung-Standesbeamte > accessed 8 August 2018. google scholar
  • Sturm F, ‘Dürfen Kinder auslaendischer Leihmutter zu ihren genetischen Eltern nach Deutschland verbracht werden?’, in Jürgen F.Baur, Otto Sandrock, Boris Scholtka und Amos Shapira (Hrsg), Festschrift für Gunther Kühne zum 70.Geburtstag (Recht und Wirtschaft 2009). google scholar
  • Sucker S, ‘To Recognize or not to Recognize? That Is The Question! Motherhood in Cross-Border Surrogacy Cases’ (2015) 17 European Journal of Law Reform 257. google scholar
  • Svitnev K, ‘Legal Control of Surrogacy-International Perspectives’ in Joseph G.Schenker (eds), Ethical Dilemmas in Assisted Reproductive Technologies (Berlin De Gruyter 2011) (Surrogacy). google scholar
  • Svitnev K, ‘New Russian Legislation on Assisted Reproduction’, (Open Access Scientific Reports) 2012, <https://www.omicsonline.org/scientific-reports/2155-9627-SR207.pdf> accessed 8 August 2018 (New Legislation). google scholar
  • Şensöz Malkoç E, ‘Uluslararası Taşıyıcı Annelik Sözleşmesinden Doğan İhtilaflarda Uygulanacak Hukuk’, (2015) 35 (2) Milletlerarası Hukuk ve Milletlerarası Özel Hukuk Bülteni 13. google scholar
  • Şensöz Malkoç E, ‘Milletlerarası Özel Hukukta Boşluk: Taşıyıcı Annelik’ (2012-2013) 25 SD Sağlık Düşüncesi ve Tıp Kültürü Dergisi 90. google scholar
  • Şıpka Ş, ‘Taşıyıcı Annelik ve Getirdiği Hukuki Sorunlar’, < http://www.turkhukuksitesi.com/ makale_537.htm > erişim tarihi 8 Temmuz 2018. google scholar
  • Thapa JD, ‘The ‘Babies M’: The Relevance of Baby Manji Yamada v. Union of India (UOI) and in the matter of Baby ‘M’, (2011) 2 Journal of Indian Law and Society 83. google scholar
  • Thorn P, ‘Reproduktives Reisen’ (Expertise im Auftrag von Pro Familia, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Familienplanung, Sexualpädagogik und Sexualberatung e.V. Bundesverband 2008), < https:// www.profamilia.de/fileadmin/publikationen/Fachpublikationen/expertise_reproduktives_ reisen.pdf > accessed 8 June 2018. google scholar
  • Trimmings K and Beaumont P (eds), International Surrogacy Agreements, Legal Regulation at the International Level (Hart Publishing 2013). google scholar
  • Trimmings K and Beaumont P ‘International Surrogacy Arrangements: An Urgent Need for Legal Regulation at the International Level’ (2011) 7 Journal of Private International Law 627. google scholar
  • Turgut C, Yapay Döllenme, Taşıyıcı Annelik ve Soybağına İlişkin Hukuki Sorunlar (On İki Levha 2016). google scholar
  • Ungan Çalışkan H, ‘Bırakınız Taşısınlar: Taşıyıcı Anneliğe Güncel Bakış’, (2016) 22 (1) Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi 489. google scholar
  • Verschelden G and Verhellen J, ‘Belgium’, in Katarina Trimmings and Paul Beaumont (eds), International Surrogacy Agreements, Legal Regulation at the International Level (Hart Publishing 2013). google scholar
  • Von Hein J, ‘German Federal Court of Justice on Surrogacy and German Public Policy’ (4.03.2015, by Jan Von Hein, by Dina Reis) <http://conflictoflaws.net/2015/german-federal-court-of-justiceon-surrogacy-and-german-public-policy > accessed 8 June 2018. google scholar
  • Vonk M and Boele-Woelki K, ‘Surrogacy and Same-Sex Couples in the Netherlands’ in Katharina Boele-Woelki and Angelika Fuchs (eds) Legal Recognition of Same Sex Relationships in Europe- National, Cross Border and European Perspectives (Intersentia 2012) 123. google scholar
  • Vonk M, ‘Maternity for Another: A Double Dutch Approach’ (2010) 14 Electronic Journal Of comparative Law 1 < https://www.ejcl.org/143/art143-22.pdf > accessed 8 August 2018. google scholar

Citations

Copy and paste a formatted citation or use one of the options to export in your chosen format


EXPORT



APA

Parlak Börü, Ş. (2019). A Difficult Turning Point in Family Law: The Current Developments on Surrogate Motherhood with a Comparative Law Perspective. Public and Private International Law Bulletin, 39(1), 63-110. https://doi.org/10.26650/ppil.2019.39.1.0065


AMA

Parlak Börü Ş. A Difficult Turning Point in Family Law: The Current Developments on Surrogate Motherhood with a Comparative Law Perspective. Public and Private International Law Bulletin. 2019;39(1):63-110. https://doi.org/10.26650/ppil.2019.39.1.0065


ABNT

Parlak Börü, Ş. A Difficult Turning Point in Family Law: The Current Developments on Surrogate Motherhood with a Comparative Law Perspective. Public and Private International Law Bulletin, [Publisher Location], v. 39, n. 1, p. 63-110, 2019.


Chicago: Author-Date Style

Parlak Börü, Şafak,. 2019. “A Difficult Turning Point in Family Law: The Current Developments on Surrogate Motherhood with a Comparative Law Perspective.” Public and Private International Law Bulletin 39, no. 1: 63-110. https://doi.org/10.26650/ppil.2019.39.1.0065


Chicago: Humanities Style

Parlak Börü, Şafak,. A Difficult Turning Point in Family Law: The Current Developments on Surrogate Motherhood with a Comparative Law Perspective.” Public and Private International Law Bulletin 39, no. 1 (Mar. 2024): 63-110. https://doi.org/10.26650/ppil.2019.39.1.0065


Harvard: Australian Style

Parlak Börü, Ş 2019, 'A Difficult Turning Point in Family Law: The Current Developments on Surrogate Motherhood with a Comparative Law Perspective', Public and Private International Law Bulletin, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 63-110, viewed 1 Mar. 2024, https://doi.org/10.26650/ppil.2019.39.1.0065


Harvard: Author-Date Style

Parlak Börü, Ş. (2019) ‘A Difficult Turning Point in Family Law: The Current Developments on Surrogate Motherhood with a Comparative Law Perspective’, Public and Private International Law Bulletin, 39(1), pp. 63-110. https://doi.org/10.26650/ppil.2019.39.1.0065 (1 Mar. 2024).


MLA

Parlak Börü, Şafak,. A Difficult Turning Point in Family Law: The Current Developments on Surrogate Motherhood with a Comparative Law Perspective.” Public and Private International Law Bulletin, vol. 39, no. 1, 2019, pp. 63-110. [Database Container], https://doi.org/10.26650/ppil.2019.39.1.0065


Vancouver

Parlak Börü Ş. A Difficult Turning Point in Family Law: The Current Developments on Surrogate Motherhood with a Comparative Law Perspective. Public and Private International Law Bulletin [Internet]. 1 Mar. 2024 [cited 1 Mar. 2024];39(1):63-110. Available from: https://doi.org/10.26650/ppil.2019.39.1.0065 doi: 10.26650/ppil.2019.39.1.0065


ISNAD

Parlak Börü, Şafak. A Difficult Turning Point in Family Law: The Current Developments on Surrogate Motherhood with a Comparative Law Perspective”. Public and Private International Law Bulletin 39/1 (Mar. 2024): 63-110. https://doi.org/10.26650/ppil.2019.39.1.0065



TIMELINE


Submitted01.03.2019
Last Revision12.03.2019
Accepted14.03.2019

LICENCE


Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC)

This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge you and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms.


SHARE




Istanbul University Press aims to contribute to the dissemination of ever growing scientific knowledge through publication of high quality scientific journals and books in accordance with the international publishing standards and ethics. Istanbul University Press follows an open access, non-commercial, scholarly publishing.