1. Objectifs

Intentions :
The objective of this study is «to report on the practice of surrogacy and the legal issues arising from the lack of legislative framework in Quebec, through the experiences and concerns expressed by intended parents and surrogates. [Authors] believe it is important to add their voices to the collective discussion, in order to reflect on social and legal responses that could lead to an appropriate regulatory framework.» (p. 84)

2. Méthode

Échantillon/Matériau :
The «sample consisted of twenty-eight participants, whom [the authors] chose to divide into two distinct groups, according to their respective roles in the procreation process. The first group corresponded to intended parents (n=13)—that is, those who formulated a parenting plan by surrogacy in Canada. This group comprised nine gay men [and] four heterosexual women […]. The second group consisted of Canadian surrogates (n=15) who were involved in surrogacy projects formulated by Québécois intended couples. Participants were women aged twenty-three to forty-two (the average age was thirty-four).» (p. 87)

Instruments :
Guide d’entretien semi-directif

Type de traitement des données :
Analyse de contenu

3. Résumé

Results reveal that «legal concerns were a major part of the discourse of surrogates and intended parents who were interviewed. The “vagueness” that persists with respect to surrogacy in Quebec forced them to navigate blindly through the administrative and bureaucratic maze, particularly with respect to the establishment of filiation and reimbursement of eligible expenses. Confronted with evasive, inconsistent, or unsatisfactory responses from government officials and health professionals, intended couples and surrogates quickly turned to social and digital networks for answers to their questions or advice from experienced individuals on the Internet. […] Social science research shows that people with poor or erroneous knowledge of the law tend to rely on beliefs about and representations of what they believe to be the current legislative framework, with all the potentially negative consequences that may result. However, it appears that a better understanding of the laws and rules affecting the couple or family does not necessarily facilitate a preventive response to potential problems, since emotional considerations also come into play. This was indeed the case in several examples reported by the interviewed surrogates and intended parents, where the relational aspect of their amicable agreement was highly valued, as opposed to a formal agreement by contract, which, despite providing greater protection, was perceived as cold and distorted.» (p. 107-108)