Christie Vetoes Commercial Surrogacy Bill

I believe IVF should be much more tightly regulated—which depicts the current status of “regulated” very loosely, as there are few rules governing the industry.  I wrote a bit ago against NJ legislation that would have opened the door to commercial womb renting.  Apparently Gov. Christie reads this blog—: )—because he vetoed the bill. From the Star Ledger story:

Gov. Chris Christie today vetoed a bill that would have relaxed New Jersey’s strict surrogate parenting law, saying the state hadn’t yet answered the “profound” questions that surround creating a child through a contract. According to the governor’s statement explaining the veto obtained by The Star-Ledger, “Permitting adults to contract with others regarding a child in such a manner unquestionably raises serious and significant issues.”

“In contrast to traditional surrogacy, a gestational surrogate birth does not use the egg of the carrier,” the governor wrote. “In this scenario, the gestational carrier lacks any genetic connection to the baby, and in some cases, it is feasible that neither parent is genetically related to the child. Instead, children born to gestational surrogates are linked to their parents by contract.”

“While some all applaud the freedom to explore these new, and sometimes necessary, arranged births, others will note the profound change in the traditional beginnings of the family that this bill will enact. I am not satisfied that these questions have been sufficiently studied by the Legislature at this time,” according to the statement.

Well, IVF in general—and certainly surrogacy in specific, most particularly of the commercial kind—are never, strictly speaking, ”necessary.”  As a consumerist intervention, it is always optional.  And let us not forget the choice of adoption.

But that point aside, there is far too much objectification of the human body and the use of body parts and substances as natural resources.  The NJ bill was a big step in the wrong direction.  Good for Christie!