As French people turned to their televisions last Friday night to watch the popular show Ce soir ou jamais (Tonight or Never), a heated argument on the pros and cons of child surrogacy unfolded before their eyes. Prominent philosophers and psychoanalysts presented their views. One thing they seemed to agree upon was that France, where surrogacy is illegal, should not tolerate or even seem to condone what’s happening in India. Indian “baby farms” or “baby factories” are regularly discussed in the French media, and the exploitation of the generally poor, Dalit or tribal women, by affluent, usually Western prospective parents, deeply shocks people right and left of the political divide.
Both surrogacy and assisted reproductive technology (mostly artificial insemination and in-vitro fertilisation) elicit very strong reactions in France, following the passing of the Marriage Equality Bill in May 2013, which enables gay couples to get married. Surrogacy is legally prohibited and medically-assisted reproduction is limited to married women by law. Yet on October 5, more than one lakh people took to the streets of Paris and Bordeaux to protest against surrogacy – an absurd position, since surrogacy is not permitted and children born to foreign surrogates and repatriated by the prospective parents do not get official French identity papers.
Cultural supremacists
The real intention of the demonstrators was to defend their vision of a mostly white, Catholic, homophobic and xenophobic France. Many of them carried placards equivocating surrogacy with child trafficking. One read: “In India, a baby costs €40,000 [roughly Rs 30 lakh]. In France, a baby is still priceless." Behind the professed concern for the wellbeing of children and of women hides the odious face of cultural superiority and racism.
François, a very courteous 50-something man holding a pink flag featuring a man, a woman and their two children, told me: “We know for a fact that in some countries like India, there are clinics, more like factories actually, where straight and gay couples go to find women who will carry children for them. Whether the clients are straight or gay, I find this practice extremely violent.”
Nearby, another participant, blond and blue-eyed 17-year old Victoire, was railing against journalists “who twist everything and are all leftists”. She also had a vehement opinion on child surrogacy in India. When asked about the source of her information, she said, “Well, the press of course. I have read many articles about India on this subject in French newspapers and I’ve seen documentaries on TV too."
The French media has carried articles about child surrogacy in India, describing the business with terms like, “the baby factory”, “the surrogacy package”, “a very lucrative business” and “a way out of poverty”. Victoire therefore had a very strong opinion: “I very well know what is happening in India," she said. "It’s horrible. I’m no feminist, mind you. I’ve never been to India and it’s up to them if they want to have a surrogacy system. But I don’t want that in my country. It’s monstrous, monstrous!”
From both sides
All this could easily be dismissed as the ranting of ultra-conservatives. But India also features prominently in the arguments of the pro-surrogacy camp, who equally condemn the exploitation of women’s bodies for mercantile ends. However, according to Doan Luu, the spokesperson for The Rainbow Families Association of France, a pro-LGBT association, “it is important to defend womens’ freedom over their own bodies in France as in India”. He added that for the past two years the Indian government has barred French couples, both straight and gay, from using Indian surrogates, because it leads to legal imbroglios when having the child officially adopted in France.
India is used as a red herring and foil in the French debate. “India keeps getting mentioned because people think, probably rightly so, that what is happening there is the exploitation of the bodies of poor women,” said Luu. “What we defend is not an Indian-style surrogacy, but on the contrary an altruistic type of surrogacy where the surrogate would get a certification based amongst other things on her financial means as well as a symbolic payment.” The example to follow is the United States or the United Kingdom, while India serves as a counter-example of how surrogacy should be dealt with.
“But why talk about about India all the time?” burst out a participant on Ce soir où jamais. Well, the French will keep talking and India, in all probability, will remain the enfant terrible of the global surrogacy debate.
We welcome your comments at
letters@scroll.in.
Both surrogacy and assisted reproductive technology (mostly artificial insemination and in-vitro fertilisation) elicit very strong reactions in France, following the passing of the Marriage Equality Bill in May 2013, which enables gay couples to get married. Surrogacy is legally prohibited and medically-assisted reproduction is limited to married women by law. Yet on October 5, more than one lakh people took to the streets of Paris and Bordeaux to protest against surrogacy – an absurd position, since surrogacy is not permitted and children born to foreign surrogates and repatriated by the prospective parents do not get official French identity papers.
Cultural supremacists
The real intention of the demonstrators was to defend their vision of a mostly white, Catholic, homophobic and xenophobic France. Many of them carried placards equivocating surrogacy with child trafficking. One read: “In India, a baby costs €40,000 [roughly Rs 30 lakh]. In France, a baby is still priceless." Behind the professed concern for the wellbeing of children and of women hides the odious face of cultural superiority and racism.
François, a very courteous 50-something man holding a pink flag featuring a man, a woman and their two children, told me: “We know for a fact that in some countries like India, there are clinics, more like factories actually, where straight and gay couples go to find women who will carry children for them. Whether the clients are straight or gay, I find this practice extremely violent.”
Nearby, another participant, blond and blue-eyed 17-year old Victoire, was railing against journalists “who twist everything and are all leftists”. She also had a vehement opinion on child surrogacy in India. When asked about the source of her information, she said, “Well, the press of course. I have read many articles about India on this subject in French newspapers and I’ve seen documentaries on TV too."
The French media has carried articles about child surrogacy in India, describing the business with terms like, “the baby factory”, “the surrogacy package”, “a very lucrative business” and “a way out of poverty”. Victoire therefore had a very strong opinion: “I very well know what is happening in India," she said. "It’s horrible. I’m no feminist, mind you. I’ve never been to India and it’s up to them if they want to have a surrogacy system. But I don’t want that in my country. It’s monstrous, monstrous!”
From both sides
All this could easily be dismissed as the ranting of ultra-conservatives. But India also features prominently in the arguments of the pro-surrogacy camp, who equally condemn the exploitation of women’s bodies for mercantile ends. However, according to Doan Luu, the spokesperson for The Rainbow Families Association of France, a pro-LGBT association, “it is important to defend womens’ freedom over their own bodies in France as in India”. He added that for the past two years the Indian government has barred French couples, both straight and gay, from using Indian surrogates, because it leads to legal imbroglios when having the child officially adopted in France.
India is used as a red herring and foil in the French debate. “India keeps getting mentioned because people think, probably rightly so, that what is happening there is the exploitation of the bodies of poor women,” said Luu. “What we defend is not an Indian-style surrogacy, but on the contrary an altruistic type of surrogacy where the surrogate would get a certification based amongst other things on her financial means as well as a symbolic payment.” The example to follow is the United States or the United Kingdom, while India serves as a counter-example of how surrogacy should be dealt with.
“But why talk about about India all the time?” burst out a participant on Ce soir où jamais. Well, the French will keep talking and India, in all probability, will remain the enfant terrible of the global surrogacy debate.