Abstract

Faced with the legitimate desire of leaving a legacy and in the name of individual freedoms, human beings refuse to suffer the fate of nature for procreation. To this end, they rely increasingly on techniques – some of which are likely to raise problems of several kinds; including ethical, moral and legal. Hence the importance of the question of their legitimacy. The techniques or practices concerned undoubtedly include surrogacy (GPA). This practice involves people wanting a child (intended parents) using a woman who agrees to bear and carry the pregnancy to term (surrogate) and then returning the child to its intended parents after birth. With this destruction of motherhood that the GPA entails, can we still say that child birth is considered recognition or that maternity is always certain? Has it not become as uncertain as paternity? Indeed, of the two or three women who contributed to the process of "manufacturing" the child, which should be legally considered to be his mother: the one who had the intention and the desire for children, the one who donated her eggs, or the one who was pregnant? Given this uncertainty and other issues that may be raised by the GPA, is it not legitimate to oppose it? While this paper responds in the affirmative, it shows that this opposition would not be sufficient and would be even unfair if it was not accompanied by other measures to treat infertility, mitigate the punishment of victims, and above all, grant a status to the children of the GPA. This means that the GPA does not only call for a legal answer.