The bleak house of surrogacy: Broidy v. St Helen's and Knowsley Health Authority

Morgan, Derek Martin 2001. The bleak house of surrogacy: Broidy v. St Helen's and Knowsley Health Authority. Feminist Legal Studies 9 (1) , pp. 57-67. 10.1023/A:1016696816195

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

This note examines the British case of Broidy v. St Helen's and Knowsley Health Authority in which Margaret Broidy was unsuccessful in a negligence action against the defendant Health Authority following an emergency caesarean operation in which a hysterectomy had been performed as `essential'. Of particular feminist interest is the fact that Broidy's claim for, inter alia, the costs of asurrogacy arrangement to be carried out in California was refused on the basis that it wasnot reasonable – the chances of success of the surrogacy arrangement being deemed too remote. Set within the context of an increasingly prolific number of world-wide surrogacy stories, the Broidy decision is analysed as providing a recent illustration of some of the difficult implications of the reproductive option which surrogacy has now become.

Item Type:	Article
Date Type:	Publication
Status:	Published
Schools:	Law
Subjects:	K Law > K Law (General)
Uncontrolled Keywords:	Damages; reproductive technologies; surrogacy; Surrogacy Arrangements Act 1985.
Publisher:	Kluwer Academic Publishers
ISSN:	0966-3622
Last Modified:	12 Feb 2016 23:31
URI:	https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/66946

Citation Data

Cited 1 time in Scopus. View in Scopus. Powered By Scopus® Data

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item