代孕制度下之親子關係認定：以子女最佳利益為中心【本期企劃】 試閱
Surrogacy and Children’s Identity: Eye’s from Children’s Perspective
自1980年代開始，人工生殖技術的發展，使代理孕母爭議逐漸引起注意，特別是1986年發生在美國紐澤西（New Jersey）州的Baby M案。Baby M案件至今已超過30年，在此期間，科技進步與社會風氣的轉變，使得代孕制度所涉及的各種倫理與法律議題，與30年前的境況不見得相同。本文在肯認代孕制度下，將以代孕子女的最佳利益來思考此議題。本文將以Planned Parenthood（計畫親職）為前提，說明尋求代孕之委託配偶，為Planned Parenthood「計畫親職」。在此情況下，在未對代孕者的身體自主權或其他任何締約協上過程中有任何剝削的前提下，其代孕子女是備受委託配偶期待的、計畫中家庭的新成員。因此，為此一「計畫親職」尋求最佳的親子法律安排，並以該子女的最佳利益為考量，本文認為是當今世代應予考量的適切作法。
This paper aims to bring the eye’s from children’s perspective to see the surrogacy mother debates. The issue of surrogacy mother had been aroused for more than three decades since Baby M case in the United States in 1980s. The autonomy and the privacy right from the side of surrogate mother have been emphasized so that womb could not be retailed. It was the major discourse from the side of anti-surrogacy. Yet in this paper, author agrees that the current draft of Assisted Reproduction Act (ARA)which is offered by the Ministry of Health and Welfare on the date of May 16, 2024. The draft of ARA Article 33 states that intended spouses will be the child’s parents since the child has been delivered. The author brings two ideas to support the ARA Article 33. One is “planned parenthood” and the other is “child’s best interest.” The author suggests that over than three decades debating, the surrogacy can be legitimated to respond to the request of modern society. For spouses seeking for surrogacy, they will be the “planned parenthood.” Therefore, for the best interest of child, the title of child’s parents should be given to the intended spouses since the moment the baby is delivered.
028-037
