Senator Moncion: Thankfully, we know that the Government of Canada is working very hard to help these Canadian families and these Ukrainian women. However, it is clear that Canada’s legislative framework heightens the inequality between women in different countries. The government is facilitating several aspects of assisted human reproduction elsewhere in the world, which benefits Canadians, but it has not considered the impact of its legislation on other parts of the world. The committee could also examine these important issues and propose solutions.

(1640)

When the current legislative framework was created and then implemented, the Royal Commission on New Reproductive Technologies told the government to proceed with care. In fact, Proceed with Care was the title of its final report, published in 1993. At the time, the government did not have the data to understand the actual impact of the policy it was proposing. We now know that the health, safety and well-being of surrogates, gamete donors, children born through the application of assisted human reproductive technologies, and future parents would be better protected by regulations than by criminal prohibitions.

[English]

No empirical evidence exists that would support a differential treatment in the western countries towards paid surrogates and women who become surrogates for altruistic reasons. Both are at risk of power imbalances and need to be better protected under an adequate regulatory framework.

Empirical evidence has significantly reduced concerns that arose in the early days of the Assisted Human Reproduction Act. It was believed and some still believe now that, in wealthy countries, surrogates would be vulnerable women who would serve the needs of wealthy families. Evidence has proven that in countries that are comparable to Canada, there is no overrepresentation of poor, uneducated or racialized women among surrogates or donors.

For example, in 2015, Maneesha Deckha, professor and Lansdowne Chair at the Faculty of Law at the University of Victoria, published an article in the McGill Law Journal. In it, she refers to U.S. research and the profile of surrogate mothers in Western countries by quoting Erin Nelson, professor of tort law. She says:

Contrary to feminist arguments made in the early days of ARTs, the women who act as surrogates are not poor, uneducated women of colour who comprise some sort of reproductive ‘underclass’ to serve the needs of wealthy white women.

While this dichotomy is one of the reasons why Canadian lawmakers justify the need to criminalize commercial surrogacy and gamete donations, it is not based on empirical evidence.

Paid or not, in the context of a wealthy country like Canada, what is needed is a legal framework that looks after everyone’s health and safety. Criminalization only fosters a climate of fear and silence, which stifles discussion and increases the risk that vulnerable people will be exploited, whether we are talking about surrogate mothers, intending parents, gamete donors, gamete recipients or children.

A Senate study would provide recommendations based on testimonies and up-to-date empirical evidence that were not, at the time, available to the sponsors of the Assisted Human Reproduction Act and the Baird commission.

[Translation]

In conclusion, our world has changed considerably since the adoption of the Assisted Human Reproduction Act and even more since the Baird Commission released its report in 1993. In light of the empirical evidence in recent academic publications and testimony from various stakeholders, the time has come for Parliament to review the extent of the empirical evidence on assisted human reproduction, to ensure that there is a legal framework that truly protects the health and safety of Canadians and that guarantees fairness and justice for the intended parents, surrogate mothers and children born through the application of assisted human reproductive technologies.

Whether or not you agree with decriminalizing payment for these practices, the time has come to review and study these issues through a 2022 lens.

Dear colleagues, I urge you to support this motion and authorize the Standing Committee on Social Affairs to study this important issue.

Thank you for your attention.

(On motion of Senator Seidman, debate adjourned.)

[English]

694 words