India has taken major legal step to assist reproduction technologies. Two important laws-the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021 and the ART (Regulation) Act, 2021-were introduced to ensure ethical practices, protect women’s health, and safeguard the rights of all parties involved. though surrogacy, IVF, and egg donation are different procedures, their laws share several key similarities:
(A) Empathy over economy: the non-commercial approach.
One of the core principles across surrogacy IVF- In vitro fertilization, and egg donation laws in India is the complete prohibition of commercial exchange, these procedures are legally allowed only under an altruistic framework, meaning that no person-whether a surrogate mother or an egg donor-can receive payment beyond basic medical costs and insurance coverage. The laws were introduced to prevent the exploitation of financially vulnerable women and to discourage treating reproduction as a business, however, this approach has drawn criticism. Many argue that such a strict ban overlook a women’s right to bodily autonomy and fair compensation. In the absence of legal payment, there is a risk that desperate individuals might engage in unregulated or underground arrangements, defeating the purpose if ethical regulation. While the altruistic model promotes dignity, it also raises complex question about freedom of choice, fairness and reproductive justice.
(B) Certified to create regulation reproduction institution.
Both the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021 and the ART (Regulation) Act, 2021 mandate that every fertility clinic, ART bank and surrogacy centre must be officially registered with designated government authorities , these facilities are required to adhere to strict ethical, technical , and operational standards , covering infrastructure, staff qualifications, documentation , and patient care . The law provide for regular inspection and impose penalties for non-compliance, helping maintain transparency and safety across the system. This framework not only streamlines fertility services in India but also acts as a safeguard against fraud, exploitation , and substandard medical practices , ensuring that hopeful parents and donors receive ethical and high-quality treatment.
(C) Limitation access: Who is legally allowed to become a parent?
A significant similarity in the laws governing surrogacy , IVF , and egg donation in India is strict eligibility criteria for intending parents. According to both the surrogacy (Regulation) Act and ART (Regulation) Act only Indian married heterosexual couples are permitted to access these reproductive services , additionally , the couple must have been married for at least five years , and fall within a specific age bracket- women must between 23 and 50 years and men between 26 and 55 years , this framework explicitly excludes single individuals , LGBTQIA + persons, live- in partners and foreign nationals regardless of their medical or emotional need to have children , while the intent may be to maintain a traditional family structure , such restrictions have been widely criticizes for being regressive and discrimination. Critics argue that the laws fail to reflection modern societal values and deny the right to parenthood to many who are willing and capable of raising a child in a loving environment.
(D) Clarity before commitment: The role of informed consent
A shared strength of both the surrogacy and ART laws is the emphasis on informed and voluntary consent. Whether it’s a surrogate mother, an egg donor, or the intending parents, no medical procedure can begin without written approval, confirming that the individual understands all medical, legal, and emotional aspects involved. to further support ethical decision – making mandatory counselling especially for surrogates and donors - to help them make well-informed choice without coercion or pressure. This legal safeguard ensures that every participant enters the process with full awareness, protecting their, dignity, and emotional well being .
(E) Safeguarding women’s health and dignity
The legal framework surrounding surrogacy , IVF , and egg donation places a strong emphasis on protecting the health , safety , and dignity of women involved in these procedures , surrogate mothers must be between 25 and 35 years of age , legally married , and must already have at least one biological child , they are required to undergo thorough physical and psychological health screenings , ensuring they are medically and emotionally prepared for the process . Moreover , a minimum health insurance cover of 36 months is mandated to protect them from post-pregnancy complications. In the case of egg donation, a woman is allowed to donate only once in her lifetime , with a maximum retrieval limit of seven eggs, these restrictions are designed to prevent physical overexertion and medical risks , particularly among women from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, and aim to ensure that their well-being is not compromised in the pursuit of parenthood for others.
(F) Closing the borders: Restricting access to Foreign citizens
A notable similarity in both the surrogacy and ART Acts is the explicit exclusion of foreign nationals from accessing reproductive services in India. Only Indian citizens and overseas citizens of India (OCI) are permitted to seek surrogacy or assisted reproductive treatments. This restriction was introduced to curb the country’s former status as a global medical tourism hub, where wealthy foreigners often engaged India surrogates- raising serious ethical concerns about the exploitation of poor India women. By limiting access to India families, the laws aim to enhance accountability, safeguard women’s rights, and ensure that such deeply personal and services are no longer driven by international demand and profit.
(G) The price of parenthood: Affordability and access remain
While the surrogacy and ART Acts lay down detailed regulations, they remain silent on the issue of affordability, which continues to be a major barrier for many India couples. Fertility treatments like IVF and surrogacy are highly expensive and are predominantly offered though private healthcare institutions, often out of reach for middle and lower income families. There are no government price regulation, subsidies, or public healthcare provisions to make these services accessible to all, as a result, the dream of becoming a parent though assisted reproduction technologies remain a privilege of the wealthy individuals. Expert and health advocates have called for state sponsored insurance schemes, financial assistance, or inclusion of fertility care under public health programs to bridge this growing gap and ensure that reproductive rights are limited by income or social class.
· Denying parenthood based on marital status contradicts the fundamental right to equality and personal liberty?
India’s current surrogacy and ART laws gives access to only married heterosexual Indian couples, thereby excluding single, widowed, divorced, and LGBTQIA+ individuals. This narrow legal definition of family has drawn widespread criticism for being outdated, exclusionary, and out of step with India’s constitution values encouragingly, the legal landscape may be changing in a significant move, the Supreme Court recently admitted a petition by a divorced man who was denied the right to opt for surrogacy, solely based on his martial status. The court has also issued notices in similar cases involving a transwoman and an unmarried woman, questioning whether such exclusions violate the fundamental right to equality, dignity, and personal liberty. These petitions represent a growing demand to re-examine restrictive family laws in light of evolving social realities. Legal experts argue that parenthood should be determined by emotional maturity, intention, and capacity to nurture a child – not by one’s gender, sexuality, or marital status. As the judiciary begins to engage with these questions, there is renewed hope for a more inclusive, rights-based framework for reproductive justice in India.
· How can we preach individual freedom while legally barring loving or same-sex couples from choosing parenthood?
This question lies at the heart of the growing debate around India’s surrogacy and ART laws. While the constitution promises equality, dignity, and personal liberty, the current legal framework limits access to assisted reproduction only to married heterosexual couples. As a result, countless individuals-whether single by choice, divorced, widowed, or part of the LGBTQIA+ community are denied the chance to build families. This legal exclusion stands in stark contrast to the idea of personal freedom that a modern democracy should uphold. Parenthood is not a privilege reserved for the traditionally married, it is a deeply personal decision that should be based on one’s emotional readiness and willingness to raise a child with love not on social labels. As society evolves, our laws must follow not to restrict, but to empower.
· Desperation and Exploitation - India’s fertility market
This concern is growing as strict surrogacy and ART laws limit access for many individuals, leading them to seek alternative paths. When legal channels are overly restrictive or expensive, vulnerable couples and women may turn to unlicensed or underground clinics that promise quick solutions but operate without proper oversight. These illegal setups often lack ethical standards, medical safety, and legal protections-putting both the surrogate and the intended parents at risk. Without protection, desperate individuals become easy targets for exploitation in every aspect of their well-being. This highlights a dangerous gap in the system: by narrowing legal access too much, the law may unintentionally push people into the hands of fraudulent actors. Ensuring transparency, affordability, and wider eligibility can reduce the chances of such exploitation and keep fertility services within a safer regulated framework.
Conclusion:
The rise of unregistered or fake fertility clinics is a troubling side effect of India’s overly restrictive reproductive laws. When legal avenues are limited to a select few, desperate individuals are left vulnerable to unsafe, unethical, and even illegal alternatives. Instead of preventing exploitation, such rigid laws may actually drive it underground-where neither the surrogate nor the intending parents have any protection. to truly safeguard people, the law must strike a balance between regulation and accessibility. Expanding legal access, enforcing clinic registration awareness can help ensure that fertility services remain safe, transparent, and respectful of everyone’s dignity and rights.