MAHKEME KARARLARINDA SINIRAŞAN TAŞIYICI ANNELİĞE İLİŞKİN HUKUKİ SORUNLAR

Year 2016, Volume: 36 Issue: 2, 1 - 52, 30.12.2016

Nuray Ekşi

Abstract

Sınıraşan taşıyıcı annelik, milletlerarası aile hukukunun en ilginç konularından bir haline

gelmiştir. Milli hukukların taşıyıcı anneliğe yaklaşımı birbirinden oldukça farklıdır.

Üstelik sınıraşan taşıyıcı anneliğe ilişkin bir milletlerarası anlaşmanın yokluğu çocuğun

vatandaşlığı, velayeti, taşıyıcı anneliğe ilişkin sözleşmelerin geçerliliği, taşıyıcı anne ile

bu yolla çocuk sahibi olan anne baba arasındaki ilişkiler, aynı cinsten kişilerin taşıyıcı

annelik yoluyla çocuk sahibi olup olamayacakları ve sınıraşan taşıyıcı anneliğe ilişkin

mahkeme kararlarının tanınması sorunları başta olmak üzere sınıraşan anneliğe ilişkin

olarak ortaya çıkan hukuki sorunların çözümünü zorlaştırmaktadır. Bu sebeple, Lahey

Akademisi, bir milletlerarası anlaşmanın yapılması amacıyla, sınıraşan taşıyıcı anneliğe

ilişkin bir çalışma başlatmıştır. Milli hukukların taşıyıcı anneliğe ilişkin farklı yaklaşımları,

mahkeme kararlarına da yansımakta ve birbirine zıt mahkeme kararları ortaya çıkmaktadır.

Çalışmamızda, sınıraşan taşıyıcı anneliğe ilişkin farklı sorunlara ilişkin mahkeme

kararları incelenecektir. Çalışmamızda, sadece milli mahkemelerin değil Avrupa Birliği

Adalet Divanı kararlarının yanı sıra Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi tarafından verilen

kararlar üzerinde de durulacaktır.

Keywords

Taşıyıcı Anne, Sınıraşan Taşıyıcı Annelik, In Vitro Fertilization, Tüp Bebek

LEGAL PROBLEMS ARISING FROM INTERNATIONAL SURROGACY IN THE COURT DECISIONS

Abstract

Cross-border surrogacy emerges as one of the most pressing topics in international family
law. The approach to surrogacy in national laws is quite diverse. Moreover, lacking an
international agreement about cross border surrogacy makes it hard to solve problems
arising from cross border surrogacy particularly in respect of nationality, parenthood of
the baby, the validity of surrogacy contracts, the relationship between surrogate mother and intended parents, whether intended parents can be same sex couples and recognition
of cross border surrogacy judgments. That is the reason why the Hague Academy has
initiated a study on cross border surrogacy with the aim of conclusion of an international
treaty. The diverse approach of national laws introduces diverse judgments concerning
cross border surrogacy. This study takes a number of recent examples of such cases and
traces the ways in which courts have sought to make judgments of different issues in cross
border surrogacy. The judgments that are referred in this study have not been only granted
by the national courts but also the European Union Court of Justice and as well as by the
European Human Rights Court.

Keywords

Surrogate Mother, Cross-border Surrogacy, In Vitro Fertilization, Tube Baby

References

• Anita L. ALLEN, Privacy, Surrogacy, and the Baby M. Case, Geo. L.J., 76(1988).
• Paul BEAUMONT/Katarina TRIMMINGS, Working Paper No 2015/2: Recent jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights in the area of cross-border surrogacy: is there still a need for global regulation of surrogacy?, s. 1-5: http://www.abdn.ac.uk/law/research/workingpapers- 455.php (31.6.2016).
• Belgian Court Recognizes Californian Surrogacy by Patrick Wautelet on November 2, 2010: http://conflictoflaws.net/2010/belgian-court-recognizes- californian-surrogacy/(9.7.2016).
• Richard BLAUWHOFF/Lisette FROHN, Chapter 10 International Commercial Surrogacy Arrangements: The Interests of the Child as a Concern of Both Human Rights and Private International Law, Fundamental Rights in International and European Law: Public and Private Law Perspectives, Christophe Paulussen, Tamara Takács, Vesna Lazić, Ben Van Rompuy, Springer 2015.
• Kristiana BRUGGER, International Law in the Gestational Surrogacy Debate, Fordham Int’l L. J., 35(2011-2012).
• Laurence BRUNET/Janeen CARRUTHERS/Konstantina DAVAKI/Derek KING/Claire MARZO/Julie MCCANDLESS, European Parliament Directorate General For Internal Polices Policy Department C: Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs Legal Affairs A Comparative Study on the Regime of Surrogacy in EU Member States, Brussels 2013. Andrea BÜCLER/Luca MARANTA, Surrogacy and International Private Law in Switzerland, the International Survey of Family Law, Bristol 2015.
• Marilyn CRAWSHAW/Eric BLYTH/Olga van den AKKER, The Changing Profile of Surrogacy in the UK-Implications for National and International Policy and Practice, J. Soc. Wel. & Fam. L., 34(2012)3.
• Ian CURRY-SUMNER/Machteld VONK, National and International Surrogacy: An Odyssey, Int’Surv. Fam. L., 2011.
• Peter De CRUZ, Comparative Healthcare Law, London, 2001. Martin ENGEL, Cross-Border Surrogacy: Time for a Convention?, Family Law and Culture in Europe: Developments, Challenges and Opportunities; Proceedings of the Fifth Conference of the Commission on European Family Law; Editors Boele-Woelki/Dethloff/Gephart, Intersentia, 2014.
• Claire FENTON-GLYNN, Review Article Human Rights and Private International Law: Regulating International Surrogacy, JPIL, 10(2014)1.
• Claire FENTON-GLYNN, The Difficulty of Enforcing Surrogacy Regulations, CLJ, 74(2015)1.
• Martha A. FIELD, Compensated Surrogacy, Wash. L. Rev., 89(2014).
• Susan FRELICH APPLETON, Surrogacy Arrangements and the Conflict of Laws, Wis. L. Rev., 1990.
• French Court Denies Recognition to American Surrogacy Judgement by Gilles Cuniberti on June 30, 2009 http://conflictoflaws.net/2009/ french-court-denies-recognition-to-american-surrogacy-judgement/ (29.8.2015).
• German Federal Court of Justice on Surrogacy and German Public Policy by Jan von Hein on March 4, 2015 By Dina Reis, Albert-Ludwigs-University Freiburg (Germany) http://conflictoflaws.net/2015/german-federalcourt- of-justice-on-surrogacy-and-german-public-policy/(24.9.2015).
• Victoria R. GUZMAN, A Comparison of Surrogacy Laws of the U.S. to Other Countries: Should There be a Uniform Federal Law Permitting Commercial Surrogacy?, Hous. J. Int’l L., 38(2016)2.
• Hague Conference on Private International Law General Affairs and Policy the Parentage/Surrogacy Project: an Updating Note Prel. Doc. No 3A February 2015 drawn up by the Permanent Bureau, Preliminary Document No 3A of February 2015 for the attention of the Council of March 2015 on General Affairs and Policy of the Conference. Bruce HALE, Regulation of International Surrogacy Arrangements: Do We Regulate the Market, or Fix the Real Problems?, Suffolk Transnat’l L. Rev., 36(2013).
• Jan von HEIN, German Federal Court of Justice on Surrogacy and German Public Policy by Jan von Hein on March 4, 2015 By Dina Reis, Albert-Ludwigs-University Freiburg (Germany): http://conflictoflaws. net/2015/german-federal-court-of-justice-on-surrogacy-and-germanpublic- policy/ (16.7.2016).
• V. JADVA/L. BLAKE/P. CASEY/S. GOLOMBOK, Surrogacy Families 10 Years on: Relationship with the Surrogate, Decisions over Disclosure and Children’s Understanding of Their Surrogacy Origins, Hum. Reprod., 27(2012)10.
• Shany Noy KIRSHNER, Selling a Miracle? Surrogacy through International Borders: Exploration of Ukrainian Surrogacy, 14(2015) J. Int’lBus. & L.
• Fiona MACCALLUM/Emma LYCETT/Clare MURRAY/Vasanti JADVA/ Susan GOLOMBOK, Surrogacy: The Experience of Commissioning Couples, Hum. Reprod., 18(2003)6.
• Anil MALHOTRA/Ranjit MALHOTRA, Law and Surrogacy Arrangements in India, Int’l Surv. Fam. L., 2013.
• Denise MEYERSON, Surrogacy agreements, Acta Juridica, 1994.
• Seema MOHAPATRA, Adopting an International Convention on Surrogacy-A Lesson from Intercountry Adoption, Loy. U. Chi. Int’l L. Rev., 13(2016)1.
• News from the Hague Conference on Private International Law, Unif. L. Rev., 17(2012).
• Lois PERREAU-SAUSSINE/Nicholas SAUVAGE, France, International Surrogacy Arrangements: Legal Regulation at the International Level Edited by Katarina Trimmings/Paul Beaumont, 2013.
• Margaret RYZNAR, International Commercial Surrogacy and Its Parties, J. Marshall L. Rev., 43(2009-2010).
• David M. SMOLIN, Surrogacy as the Sale of Children: Applying Lessons Learned from Adoption to the Regulation of the Surrogacy Industry’s Global Marketing of Children, Pepp. L. Rev., 43(2016).
• Viveca SÖDERSTRÖM-ANTTILA/Ulla-Britt WENNERHOLM/Anne LOFT/Anja PINBORG/Kristiina AITTOMÄK/Liv Bente ROMUNDSTAD/ Christina BERGH, Surrogacy: Outcomes for Surrogate Mothers, Children and the Resulting Families-a Systematic Review, Hum. Reprod. Update, 22(2015)2.
• Barbara STARK, Transnational Surrogacy and International Human Rights Law, ILSA J. Int’l & Comp. L., 18(2011-2012).
• Richard F. STORROW, Travel into the Future of Reproductive Technology, UMKC L. Rev., 79(2010)2.
• Margaret E. SWAIN, Assisted Reproductive Technology and the Family Law Practitioner, Am. J. Fam. Law., 30(216)2.
• Xinran Cara TANG, Setting Norms: Protections for Surrogates in International Commercial Surrogacy, Minn. J. Int’l L., 25(2016)1.
• Caroline VINCENT/Alene D. AFTANDILIAN, Liberation or Exploitation: Commercial Surrogacy and the Indian Surrogate, Suffolk Transnat’l L. Rev., 36(2013)3.
• Mrinal VJAY, Commercial Surrogacy Arrangements: The Unresolved Dilemmas, U.C.L.J.L.J., 3(2014).
• Lindy WILLMOTT, Surrogacy: Art’s Forgotten Child, U.N.S.W.L.J., 29(2006)2.