Stage 1 of the surrogacy grand tour
Sunday November 30, 2014

Stage 1 of the surrogacy grand tour

Sunday, November 30, 2014
Recently I undertook three weeks away from the office, travelling almost 40,000 km in the process, as the followers of my Twitter feed and Facebook feed would already be aware.

Stage 1 of the surrogacy grand tour was in Sydney. I attended there for the Australian national family law conference. As usually happens with such conferences, I enjoyed stimulating topics by interesting speakers, and caught up with friends and colleagues, some of whom had come from the other side of the world.

What I had not expected to occur was another media fire storm, albeit thankfully not on the same scale as Baby Gammy. The ABC had been working on a story about an Australian couple who had been having twins in India some years before, but decided that they only wanted one of the twins because it was the “wrong” gender. The issue was raised by Family Court Chief Justice Diana Bryant, who said that the child had allegedly been taken care of by family, but that consular staff believed that money had changed hands, which meant of course that there was baby trafficking occurring.

Then Chief Federal Court Judge John Pascoe took the matter further. His Honour spoke at length about surrogacy. He had a dramatic prop for his speech. It was a box, not much bigger than a shoe box. Babies packed in boxes like this one had been found in a baby trafficking racket in Indochina. His Honour sought to emphasise that the most vulnerable, the children, need to be the ones protected most in any surrogacy arrangement. His Honour spoke of the twins, born to a Norwegian couple, who  had been unable to leave India. These children were born Stateless and were not recognised in either India or Norway!A disaster that should have been avoided by getting legal advice in both places before starting out- but still a disaster for the intended parents, but especially for the children.

Following these speeches, the media again took a keen interest in surrogacy. I found myself in the thick of it. In one day I had:

  • four TV interviews: ABC 24, ABC TV news, SBS World News, The Project (Ten network)
  • 3 radio interviews: AM (ABC Radio National), ABC Darwin, Checkpoint (NZ Radio)
  • 1 print/web interview: The Guardian Australia 
I hope it makes a difference, and that we are able to have a regime of regulation in this country that is able to protect all concerned- intended parents, surrogates, their partners, donors, their partners, and above all the children, but enable people to achieve their innate desires to become parents. 
And the surprise of the interviews? Having the Family Court tweet that in my interview with ABC 24 I had accurately related the state of surrogacy laws in Australia. 
Request an Appointment
Fill in the form below to find out if you have a claim.
Request an Appointment - Stephen Page
Things to Read, Watch & Listen
Self-Represented Litigant Family Court Australia: Guide to Section 102NA & Unbundled Services

Self-Represented Litigant in Family Court Australia: What You NEED to Know First

Representing yourself in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia is increasingly common. Cost pressures, the perceived simplicity of some disputes and a desire to stay hands-on drive many people to act without a lawyer. That can work in certain circumstances, but there are important legal and practical limits to be aware of —… Read More »Self-Represented Litigant in Family Court Australia: What You NEED to Know First

Australia's Surrogacy Law Reform: A Lawyer's Wish List for National Consistency

My Surrogacy Reform Wish List for Australia

Australia’s surrogacy framework is fragmented, outdated and producing avoidable harm for intended parents, surrogates and, most importantly, children. A clearer, fairer and nationally consistent approach to surrogacy law reform would reduce cost, stress and legal uncertainty while better protecting human rights and minimising exploitation. Below is a practical wish list for reform that focuses on… Read More »My Surrogacy Reform Wish List for Australia

Harmful proceedings orders

A change that was made to the Family Law Act 1975 in 2024 was to allow the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia and the Family Court of Western Australia to make a harmful proceedings order. This is to stop the never ending cycle of abusive court proceedings, which often stretch on for a decade, and… Read More »Harmful proceedings orders

Family Law Section Law Council of Australia Award
Member of Queensland law society
Family law Practitioners Association
International Academy of Family Lawyers - IAFL
Mediator Standards Board