District medical boards may allow virtual proceedings in Surrogacy cases: Delhi HC – Medical Dialogues

Report on Delhi High Court Ruling on Virtual Surrogacy Proceedings and its Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction: Delhi High Court’s Landmark Observation

The Delhi High Court has issued a significant observation regarding the procedures for couples applying for surrogacy. This report analyzes the court’s directive, which permits District Medical Boards to conduct proceedings virtually, thereby removing the mandatory requirement for the physical presence of applicants. This decision is examined through the framework of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), highlighting its contribution to health, equality, and justice.

Alignment with SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

The court’s ruling directly supports the objectives of SDG 3, which aims to ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages.

• Enhanced Access to Reproductive Health: By allowing virtual appearances, the decision improves access to assisted reproductive technologies for couples, a key component of reproductive healthcare.
• Reduced Mental and Physical Strain: The ruling mitigates the stress, financial burden, and physical exhaustion associated with mandatory travel, thereby protecting the mental and physical well-being of intending parents during an already challenging process.
• Promotion of Health Equity: It ensures that access to essential medical-legal procedures is not hindered by logistical challenges, contributing to more equitable health outcomes.

Advancing SDG 5: Gender Equality

This procedural reform is a step towards achieving SDG 5, which focuses on gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls.

• Empowerment in Reproductive Choices: The simplification of the surrogacy process empowers individuals, particularly women, by providing them with more accessible and autonomous pathways to exercise their reproductive choices.
• Alleviating Social Pressures: By removing a significant procedural barrier, the ruling helps lessen the societal and familial pressures often faced by women concerning childbearing.
• Equal Access to Institutional Processes: It ensures that women have equal and unhindered access to the institutional frameworks governing reproductive health, a critical aspect of gender equality.

Promoting SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

The decision is instrumental in advancing SDG 10, which calls for the reduction of inequality within and among countries.

1. Geographical Inequality: The allowance for virtual proceedings dismantles geographical barriers, ensuring that couples from remote or rural areas are not disadvantaged compared to their urban counterparts.
2. Socio-economic Inequality: It reduces the indirect costs associated with the surrogacy application process, such as travel and accommodation expenses, making it more accessible to individuals from varied economic backgrounds.
3. Disability and Health-based Inequality: The reform provides crucial access for couples where one or both partners may have disabilities or health conditions that make travel difficult, fostering a more inclusive system.

Strengthening SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

The High Court’s observation contributes to building effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions, as outlined in SDG 16.

• Modernization of Institutions: The integration of technology into judicial and administrative proceedings demonstrates a commitment to creating more efficient, responsive, and modern public institutions.
• Enhanced Access to Justice: By making the process more convenient and accessible, the ruling ensures that all citizens can more easily navigate the legal and administrative requirements for surrogacy.
• Development of Inclusive Systems: This directive encourages the development of people-centric institutional practices that are adaptable to the needs of the population, thereby strengthening the rule of law and public trust.

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

  The article discusses surrogacy, which is a method of assisted reproduction and falls under the umbrella of reproductive healthcare. The Delhi High Court’s observation aims to make the process more accessible for couples, which directly relates to ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being by reducing logistical and emotional stress associated with accessing these services.

• SDG 5: Gender Equality

  This goal is relevant as it includes targets related to ensuring universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights. Surrogacy is a key aspect of reproductive rights, and making the legal and administrative procedures more accessible, as suggested by the court, supports the empowerment of individuals to make decisions about their reproductive lives.

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  The article is centered on a judicial observation by the Delhi High Court, a key institution of justice. The court’s guidance for district medical boards to allow virtual proceedings is a step towards creating more effective, accessible, and responsive institutions. It modernizes administrative procedures to better serve the public, removing unnecessary physical barriers to justice and administrative approval.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 3.7 (under SDG 3)

   “By 2030, ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health-care services, including for family planning, information and education, and the integration of reproductive health into national strategies and programmes.” The article connects to this target by addressing a procedural barrier to accessing surrogacy, a specialized reproductive health service. Allowing virtual proceedings for medical board approvals makes this service more universally accessible, especially for couples who may face challenges with physical travel.

2. Target 5.6 (under SDG 5)

   “Ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights…” The court’s ruling facilitates the exercise of reproductive rights by simplifying the administrative process required for surrogacy. By removing the insistence on physical presence, the system becomes less burdensome and more accommodating, thereby supporting universal access.

3. Target 16.6 (under SDG 16)

   “Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.” The High Court’s observation encourages district medical boards to become more effective and efficient by adopting modern technology. Virtual proceedings can streamline the approval process, making the institution more responsive to the needs of the applicants.

4. Target 16.7 (under SDG 16)

   “Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels.” By allowing couples to appear virtually, the decision-making process of the medical boards becomes more inclusive and responsive. It accommodates the circumstances of individuals who cannot be physically present, ensuring they can still participate in the proceedings concerning their application.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

The article does not mention any official SDG indicators. However, based on its content, the following progress indicators can be implied:

• Implied Indicator for Targets 3.7 and 5.6:

  The primary implied indicator is the adoption of policies and procedures that reduce barriers to accessing reproductive health services. The specific action mentioned—allowing virtual proceedings by district medical boards—serves as a direct measure of progress. One could track the number or percentage of medical boards that implement this facility for surrogacy applicants.

• Implied Indicator for Target 16.6:

  An implied indicator is the proportion of public services that are accessible through digital or virtual channels. The court’s ruling promotes the digitalization of a specific administrative service. Measuring the extent to which such recommendations are implemented across various public bodies would indicate progress towards more effective institutions.

• Implied Indicator for Target 16.7:

  Progress can be measured by the number of institutional measures taken to enhance inclusivity and accessibility in administrative decision-making. The shift from mandatory physical presence to allowing virtual appearance is a clear example of such a measure, which can be quantified and tracked.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: medicaldialogues.in