The Assisted Reproduction Act (人工生殖法) is widely regarded as outdated and inadequate. It does not really provide for single women and lesbian couples in many respects, and drives thousands of intended parents overseas. While the big philosophical and legal debate about surrogacy has dragged on for almost three decades, single women and lesbian couples should not have to wait another decade to access assisted reproductive technology.
Amendments proposed in May aim to legalize altruistic surrogacy, while expanding access to fertility treatments for single women and lesbian couples. However, the government creates confusion when it combines surrogacy legislation with expanded reproductive rights.
Nearly 90 percent of respondents in a poll published on Sept. 10 said they feel the reform fails to address the full scope of assisted reproduction, including the implications for legalizing surrogacy. Opponents of surrogacy are likely to reject the entire package if the issues remain intertwined.
The vague terms in the proposed surrogacy bill risk infringing on the rights of all parties involved. Clear contracts are essential for outlining the obligations and expectations for everyone in case of challenging situations such as a miscarriage, abortion or stillbirth.
The agreements should ask tough questions head-on: Can genetic parents require a surrogate carrying multiple fetuses to terminate one or more? What if the intended parents refuse to take custody of a child with severe deformities? The current draft does not address such dilemmas.
In addition, altruistic surrogates are highly vulnerable to exploitation and backdoor commercialization under the proposed surrogacy amendments. Without clear guidelines for surrogacy agencies, the system could be easily manipulated, as the government hands oversight of qualifications and accountability to a vaguely defined “central competent authority.”
The government also fails to outline what constitutes reasonable fees for surrogacy organizations, allowing unethical agents to profit from brokering surrogacy arrangements at the expense of surrogates and intended parents.
Taiwan has a plunging birthrate, with a fertility rate of 0.87 children per woman in 2022, well below the 2.1 needed to sustain a stable population. While surrogacy requires careful legal frameworks, the legislation needs to address the right to in vitro fertilization treatments for women and lesbian couples, who have long been denied the freedom to make their own choices.
Single women deserve the right to motherhood no less than their married counterparts. The current act not only limits women’s body autonomy, but also entrenches the archaic belief that motherhood must be tied to marriage. While women can freeze their eggs, the law does not allow unmarried women to use fertility treatments, resulting in less than 10 percent of women using their stored eggs.
Fertility specialists say that most women seeking treatments are at least 35 years old and face higher chances of pregnancy complications. Forcing single women to find a partner to start a family would inevitably jeopardize the health of the child and the parent.
Single parenthood empowers women to defy outdated norms and start families on their own terms. Under the influence of patriarchal family values, unmarried mothers face shame, stigma and disadvantages.
Critics often say it is selfish for unwed women to prioritize their desire for motherhood over the welfare of the child. Yet, single mothers by choice typically make well thought out plans for parenthood, including wills and guardianship agreements to ensure the child’s well-being.
Research by Susan Golombok, a professor of family research and director of the Centre for Family Research at the University of Cambridge, shows that many women choose to parent alone rather than put themselves in less desirable situations, financially and in relationships. It is every parent’s responsibility, not just single mothers, to ensure they have sufficient resources and robust support networks to provide a stable and loving environment for their child.
Denying medically assisted pregnancies to lesbian couples reinforces patriarchal norms that favor the heterosexual family structure. Some say that children need a father, but research shows that children raised in lesbian households fare better psychologically than their peers. Children’s welfare is not an excuse to justify unfounded bias favoring traditional family values.
While the draft amendments have the right intention in seeking to tackle long-existing fertility inequality, they fall short in lacking anti-discrimination clauses. For example, single women should not be the only group required to provide parenting plans and support system details before receiving fertility treatments.
For decades, women have been criticized for Taiwan’s declining birthrate, for eschewing motherhood for better career prospects or for just simply embracing different lifestyles. Rather than blaming women, society should ensure that fertility treatments are accessible to all who are ready for parenthood, regardless of their relationship status or sexual orientation. However, surrogacy requires more time to establish clear legal frameworks and should not be rushed into the current draft, which would only leave potential parents trudging through legal uncertainties.
Lo Yi-ting is a freelance writer based in the UK, focusing on geopolitics and gender-related issues.
Taiwan’s semiconductor industry gives it a strategic advantage, but that advantage would be threatened as the US seeks to end Taiwan’s monopoly in the industry and as China grows more assertive, analysts said at a security dialogue last week. While the semiconductor industry is Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” its dominance has been seen by some in the US as “a monopoly,” South Korea’s Sungkyunkwan University academic Kwon Seok-joon said at an event held by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. In addition, Taiwan lacks sufficient energy sources and is vulnerable to natural disasters and geopolitical threats from China, he said.
After reading the article by Hideki Nagayama [English version on same page] published in the Liberty Times (sister newspaper of the Taipei Times) on Wednesday, I decided to write this article in hopes of ever so slightly easing my depression. In August, I visited the National Museum of Ethnology in Osaka, Japan, to attend a seminar. While there, I had the chance to look at the museum’s collections. I felt extreme annoyance at seeing that the museum had classified Taiwanese indigenous peoples as part of China’s ethnic minorities. I kept thinking about how I could make this known, but after returning
What value does the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) hold in Taiwan? One might say that it is to defend — or at the very least, maintain — truly “blue” qualities. To be truly “blue” — without impurities, rejecting any “red” influence — is to uphold the ideology consistent with that on which the Republic of China (ROC) was established. The KMT would likely not object to this notion. However, if the current generation of KMT political elites do not understand what it means to be “blue” — or even light blue — their knowledge and bravery are far too lacking
Taipei’s population is estimated to drop below 2.5 million by the end of this month — the only city among the nation’s six special municipalities that has more people moving out than moving in this year. A city that is classified as a special municipality can have three deputy mayors if it has a population of more than 2.5 million people, Article 55 of the Local Government Act (地方制度法) states. To counter the capital’s shrinking population, Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) held a cross-departmental population policy committee meeting on Wednesday last week to discuss possible solutions. According to Taipei City Government data, Taipei’s