Couple opts for surrogacy, given someone else’s baby

  • Posted on: September 03, 2020

A NRI couple wanted a child, however, their age and health conditions were probably not suitable. A fertility specialist was consulted. She confirmed, after performing tests, that the sperm sample was healthy. She advised surrogacy which the couple readily agreed.

Some medicines were prescribed and eggs were collected as per schedule. The doctor informed the couple that zygote formation was successful and was implanted in surrogate mother’s womb.

The expectant couple were joyous when a healthy child was delivered to them. They wanted to return to USA and the surrogate child went through compulsory DNA testing. The test result pulled the ground beneath their feet – the child’s DNA did not match neither with the father’s gene nor with the mother’s!

The shocked couple approached the embassy and requested to look into the matter. They were informed that their plea could be considered, if the doctor could be brought in along with the agreement copy. The couple called the doctor, who probably anticipated the couple’s move.

The doctor casually remarked that ‘such mistakes were common in medical practice’, and claimed that the agreement copy was misplaced. In short, she was unwilling to cooperate and show her face.

Disillusioned by the double-dealing doctor, the couple sued her and also filed a complaint with State Medical Council.

The doctor’s only statement was a refusal to provide detail of surrogate mother as it was against the privacy rule.

What about the number of rules you broke? You promised the couple that the child borne by surrogate mother was their biological child, but handed over someone else’s baby! This was the first and defining remark made by the Consumer Commission, as the doctor was held negligent.

The Commission also observed that State Medical Council had followed up on the couple’s complaint and after thorough investigation, the doctor was found negligent and was barred to practice for five years!

This case is probably an apt example of ‘bad peas in a pod’ – ulterior motives of some creates a trust deficit in the society.

Source: Order pronounced by Telangana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, on 6th March, 2020.