144th Day Of Lockdown

Maharashtra57273440144219427 Tamil Nadu3321052722515641 Andhra Pradesh2818171911172562 Karnataka2111081281823718 Delhi1519281351084178 Uttar Pradesh140775887862280 West Bengal98459671202059 Telangana9025966196684 Bihar8274154139450 Gujarat71064542382652 Assam5883842326145 Rajasthan5249738235789 Odisha4592731785321 Haryana4163534781483 Madhya Pradesh3902529020996 Kerala3811424922127 Jammu and Kashmir2489717003472 Punjab2390315319586 Jharkhand185168998177 Chhatisgarh12148880996 Uttarakhand96326134125 Goa871259575 Tripura6161417641 Puducherry5382320187 Manipur3752204411 Himachal Pradesh3371218114 Nagaland30119738 Arunachal Pradesh223115923 Chandigarh1595100425 Meghalaya11154986 Sikkim9105101 Mizoram6203230

Kerala High Court okays maternity leave for surrogate moms

DC CORRESPONDENT
Published Jan 7, 2015, 8:15 am IST
Updated Mar 30, 2019, 2:15 am IST
'The women, who had a baby through surrogacy, should be treated as natural mothers'
Kerala High Court on Tuesday held that there should not be any discrimination against a woman employee who had a baby through surrogacy while extending maternity benefits. (Photo: DC/File)
 Kerala High Court on Tuesday held that there should not be any discrimination against a woman employee who had a baby through surrogacy while extending maternity benefits. (Photo: DC/File)

Kochi: Kerala High Court on Tuesday held that there should not be any discrimination against a woman employee who had a baby through surrogacy while extending maternity benefits.

Justice Dama Seshadri Naidu observed that P. Geetha, deputy general manager of Kerala Livestock Development Board, who had a surrogate baby, was   entitled to maternity leave.

 

But the court made it clear that the petitioner was entitled to post-delivery leave and she could not extend it in the name of health.  The petitioner did not bear the child and she could not insist on leave for convalescing and regaining her health.

Ms Geetha had lost her son in an accident and her uterus was removed.  Later, she and her husband decided to go for surrogacy, but the department denied her maternity leave. Her surrogate baby was born on June 18, 2014.

The department denied her maternity leave and subsequently she moved the court.

 

“There should not be any discrimination on account of women having a child through surrogacy. Surrogacy is not illegal in the country. All the international and domestic declarations only establish that there should not be any discrimination towards a surrogate or genetic mother,” the court held.

It observed that child-specific statutory benefits, if any, could be extended to the petitioner.

Thushara James, appearing for the petitioner, argued that there could not be any justification for refusing maternity leave for the reason that the baby was born thorough a surrogate mother. She also contended that motherhood was an integral part of womanhood and with the advanced Assisted Reproduction Methods in place, one could not cling to the traditional meaning of maternity.

 

“The women, who had a baby through surrogacy, should be treated as natural mothers and they should not be discriminated merely on the ground that the mother did not bear a child in her womb,” she said.

The Livestock Development Board contended that at present there was no law to mandate surrogacy and that the Board had given the petitioner extraordinary leave of 62 days.

...
Location: Kerala




ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT