Development of Assisted Reproduction Technologies and Conceptual Crisis in Establishing Motherhood

At present, family law lacks a coherent doctrine of parenthood, in general, and maternity, in particular. The existing ideas pertaining to issues of establishing legal maternity in the context of assisted reproduction technologies fail to provide a logically consistent system of conclusions and recommendations in this area. The current legal science is lagging in the development of a concept of maternity, having to borrow knowledge from other branches of science.

In this article, the author examines the ongoing transformation of the institution of maternity in family law under the influence of biomedical technologies. In terms of legal representation, maternity is a multidimensional issue. In this connection, the author formulates a number of research tasks, including establishment of (1) maternity criteria and the legal status of the mother, (2) specific features in the protection of rights and interests of the born child, and (3) influence of assisted reproduction technologies when determining maternity.

The author concludes that the development of biomedical technologies and evolution of the institution of the family are driving the need for a new paradigm of the parental legal relationship. In this paradigm, the rights of both social parent and biological parent could be properly recognized and defined. Hence, parenthood, in general, and motherhood, in particular, would be a legally recognized relationship formed from the intention of the subjects to recognize themselves as parents of a particular child.

1. Akhmatyanova, V.A., Sagitova, I.F. (2018). Auxiliary reproductive technologies in Russia: issues of law. Business. Education. Law. Bulletin of Volgograd Business Institute, (3(44)), 318–323. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.25683/VOLBI.2018.44.327

2. Akinkina, Y.M. (2020). Principles of «natural parenthood» in modern families. 9(4), 103–109. Journal of Modern Foreign Psychology, 9(4), 103–109. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17759/jmfp.2020090409

3. Alborov, S.V. (2019). Legal and individual regulation of surrogacy. (Dissertation, Russian State University of Justice, Moscow). Moscow. (In Russ.).

4. Bogdan, V.V., Urda, M.N. (2022). Surrogacy & Human Trafficking: Interbranch Conflict. Perm University Herald. Juridical Sciences, (58), 628–657. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17072/1995-4190-2022-58-628-657

5. Bogdanova, E.E., Belova, D.A. (2022). Artificial human reproduction: the search for an optimal model of legal regulation. Moscow: Prospect Publ. (In Russ.).

6. Chernova, J.V., Shpakovskaya, L.L. (2023). A Start in Life: a Sociological Essay on Education, Class Inequality, and Social Exclusion in Russia. St. Petersburg: Press of the European University at St. Petersburg. (In Russ.).

7. Dikova, I.A. (2008). On the issue of subjects of legal relations in the sphere of application of assisted reproductive technologies. Jurist, (11), 46–51. (In Russ.).

8. Dorfman, D. (2016). Surrogate parenthood: Between genetics and intent. Journal of Law and the Biosciences, 3(2), 404–412. https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsw017

9. Douglas, T., Devolder, K. (2019). A conception of genetic parenthood. Bioethics, 33(1), 54–59. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12493

10. Gostin, L.O. (2001). Surrogacy from the Perspectives of Economic and Civil Liberties. Journal of Contemporary Health Law and Policy, 17(2), 429–431. https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/1815

11. Horsey, K. (2017). Challenging presumptions: legal parenthood and surrogacy arrangements. In: Parental Rights and Responsibilities (pp. 287–312). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315090085-15

12. Khazova, O.A. (2022). The Concept of Social Parenthood in The Context of Russian Family Law. Zakon, (1), 77–86. (In Russ.).

13. Kirichenko, K.A. (2011) Two approaches to understanding the legal essence of assisted reproductive technologies. Medical Law, 3(37), 35–40. (In Russ.).

14. Komissarova, E.G. (2022). Parenthood as a Family Law Phenomenon: a Theoretical Look at the Current Normative Origins. Lex Russica, 75(6), 20–35. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17803/1729-5920.2022.187.6.020-035

15. Lewis, B.C. (2010). Three Lies and a Truth: Adjudicating Maternity in Surrogacy Disputes. Cleveland-Marshall Legal Studies Paper No. 10-193. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1661921 Meyer, D.I. (2021). Russian Сivil Law. Moscow: Statut Publ. (In Russ.).

16. Mikhnevich, A.V., Samoilova, V.V. (2020). Legal grounds for the application of auxiliary reproductive technologies as a variety of biomedical technologies. International Journal of Humanities and Natural Sciences, (5-4), 91–96. Available at: http://intjournal.ru/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Mihnevich2.pdf. (In Russ.).

17. Mikryukov, V.A. (2021). Analogy of law in the practice of resolving family law disputes. Moscow: Statut Publ. (In Russ.).

18. Mills, C. (2021). Nuclear families: mitochondrial replacement techniques and the regulation of parenthood. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 46(3), 507–527. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243920934542

19. Momotov, V.V. (2019). Bioethics in the Context of Law-Making and Law Enforcement (Surrogate Motherhood). Lex Russica, (1), 29–39. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17803/1729-5920.2019.146.1.029-039

20. NeJaime, D. (2015). Marriage equality and the new parenthood. Harvard Law Review, 5(129), 1185–1266. https://harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/1185-1266-Online.pdf

21. NeJaime, D. (2017). The Nature of Parenthood. Yale Law Journal, 126(8), 2260–2449. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2990640

22. NeJaime, D. (2020). The Constitution of Parenthood. Stanford Law Review, 72, 261–380. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3446018

23. Nekrasova, E.V. (2019). Some Features of the Emergence of Parental Rights and Responsibilities in European Countries. Scientific Notes of V. I. Vernadsky Crimean Federal University. Juridical science, 5(71) (3), 294–298. (In Russ.).

24. Shultz, M. M. (1990). Reproductive technology and intent-based parenthood: an opportunity for gender neutrality. Wisconsin Law Review, (2), 297–398.

25. Spiridonov, D.V., Polyakova, I.G. (2024). The Postponement of Childbearing and Assisted Reproductive Technologies: Socio-economic and Demographic Aspects. Universe of Russia, 33(3), 75–98 (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17323/1811-038X-2024-33-3-75-98

26. Svitnev, K.N. (2008). Is a law on ART needed? Assisted reproductive technologies and their legal regulation. In: National identity of Russia and the demographic crisis. Materials of the II All-Russian Scientific Conference (Moscow, November 15, 2007) (pp. 819–825). Moscow: Nauchnyi ekspert Publ. (In Russ.).

27. Ulianova, M.V. (2024). The Exercise of Family Rights and Performance of Obligations in the Structure of Family Legal Relations. Perm University Herald. Juridical Sciences, 1(63), 112–133. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17072/1995‐4190‐2024‐63‐112‐133

28. Usacheva, E.A. (2019) Social fatherhood (motherhood): statement of the problem. Russian Juridical Journal, (6), 115–120. (In Russ.).