The French debatosphere has heated up recently not only over how could the national soccer team play so terribly or what is the President thinking of when he proposes that the new public TV czar be appointed by...the President (see "Behind the Glitz and the Gaffes" in this section), but also over a bill being debated in the Senate to legalize certain instances of surrogate motherhood. Hearings included expert testimony by two philosophers, Elizabeth Badinter and Sylviane Agacinski, both of whom have written extensively on feminism and gender. All forms of what is called "gestation for another" (GPA) are currently banned in France, and any children born by this means in other countries have no civil status in France. (In rapt attendance at the recent hearings were parents of such children, from whom legalization would remove a sizable burden.)
The proposed text, which is still a long way from law, includes a number of limits: GPA would only be a legal recourse for women who have no uterus or suffer from other severe forms of infertility; there must be a married or legally identified, heterosexual couple behind the request; a minimum of one of the parents must be implicated biologically in the foetus; and the couple must have primary residence in France (to avoid "procreational tourism"). As for the gestatrice, she must already have given birth and would be limited to two surrogacies, and she may be the beneficiary’s sister but not her mother. Of particular importance in the eyes of many are the stipulations designed to keep the activity completely out of the marketplace: no remuneration except a State-regulated indemnity of a fixed amount, and no intermediaries. A certificate issued by a State biomedical commission would be required. Finally the surrogate mother would have three days after birth to retract and keep the child. Negative examples during the debate came largely from US experience, positive ones from Canadian or British policy results.