India changed its policies (not laws) on 9 July, 2012, but didn't bother to tell anyone until late October when word leaked out. The new policies weren't seemingly enforced until December. In the meantime, Australian intended parents have signed surrogacy arrangements, paid substantial sums of money, have pregnant surrogates, and don't know whether they can go to India and collect the babies. Those children will be born stateless, and may never be able to come to Australia. There may be horrendous outcomes for those children.
The discriminatory policy that India put in place on 9 July isn't based on any law, and runs counter to the non-discriminatory approach in the draft ART Bills.
Many eligible intended parents who were considering undertaking surrogacy in India, are steering clear of India because of the perception of regulatory risk. I have been asked many times: “What next?” Others are still prepared to go to India.
Hundreds of Australian intended parents have undertaken surrogacy in India each year. Before India changed its rules, many couples from Queensland, NSW and the ACT were going to India for surrogacy, even though it was an offence to do so in those places. Those intended parents cannot now go to India. In their desperation, they will go elsewhere. The changes will inevitably mean more Australians going to Thailand, the US, more exotic locations, undertaking more altruistic surrogacy back home, and increasing pressure to have commercial surrogacy in Australia.
The legal journey taken by intending parents going overseas is a legal minefield.
It is legal to undertake commercial, traditional surrogacy in the NT.
Finally, the idea of trafficking children ordinarily takes on the idea of a child being stolen or sold. Surrogacy is not that process. It is the process of creating a child, who is ordinarily genetically related to one or both intended parents. The effect of Australia’s confusing citizenship laws mean in effect that children born through surrogacy to Australian intended parents in India must be genetically the child of one or both Australian parents. That is hardly trafficking

This is the first article I have seen which goes deeper into the issues of the IVF child rights and their human rights and explores the legal LIMBO on both sides of the pond. As an IVF father who was an immigrant in the US, I am living in EXILE because my IVF child was NOT welcome to the US without a "US green card mother". There are other instances in IVF where there may be NO LEGAL MOTHER. Quite possibly, for the first time in history of humankind, we are producing babies without "LEGAL MOTHERS". And historically, child rights are tied to mother's rights. SO what happens when children are born without a LEGAL MOTHER? Do the innocent children have rights? Are they human or are they a "product" of the IVF industry? Can a car manufacturer make a car which is unsafe on the roads? Then how can the IVF industry produce a "baby" who is born into LEGAL LIMBO? What about the safety and security of the innocent IVF children? As another reader mentioned, these stateless children may be in a "horrendous" situation. And who placed them there? Clearly, it was NOT the child, then why are they getting the punishment?

Having correct legal birth documents is the right of the child NOT the parent. It is a document that the child will carry for their lifetime. Let us hope in all this IVF children are treated EQUALLY as natural born children and let us remember that a great technology like IVF is supposed to soften infertility, not complicate it. The intent of IVF is the CHILD, not parents. So let us first protect the basic human rights and child rights of innocent and voiceless IVF children.

Laws for IVF/surrogacy are in its infancy all over the world. We need a global consensus on protecting first the innocent IVF child rights and then everything else.

There is a woman in Perth I spoke with recently who runs a business out of her house pushing commercial surrogacy in India. She arranges the contracts, wires, follow-through and all communication with the clinic. How does the government allow such a trade to exist? This woman claims she has helped deliver over 150 babies to Australian nationals. How does one report income that goes against the laws of our nation.

It would seem to me that there are politicians in this country and diplomatic officials in India who are getting their palms greased and looking the other way. This all sounds rather shady in my opinion.