How law shuts doors on men who want kids, but not with women

The Supreme Court recently expanded the definition of a family to bring into its fold “unmarried partnerships” and “queer relationships”. The SC even underlined that these atypical families deserve protection under law along with social welfare benefits. While much applauded across quarters, this judicial validation failed to bring cheer to fashion designer Ketan* and his partner Goutam* who’ve been living together in Mumbai for the past decade. For them, the idea of being a family, without the right to become parents – courtesy the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021 – holds little attraction. “If all families are indeed equal then why restrict our right to parenthood? Should this rule not permeate into other facets of a household as well? Why do we constantly have to be at the mercy of policymakers to lead a fulfilling life?” says Ketan. Passed in December last year, the new surrogacy law has tightly shut all doors of parenthood on India’s men – both single and gay. And with most relatively affordable overseas options like Ukraine and Georgia too being closed to them, many confess they have given their hopes of having a child a quiet burial. These countries now allow surrogacy only for married, heterosexual couples. “The US and Colombia are still accepting of us, but they will break our bank,” says Naveen*, a medical practitioner who lives in Hyderabad with his partner Raj*, who works in the hospitality sector. “Our research tells us it will cost between Rs 1.5 crore and Rs 2 crore in the US – which is all our life’s savings. How can we be happy parents if it leaves us financially drained?” adds Naveen. Heartbroken, the couple feel they will never be accepted by society in India and live with respect. But others like advocate Karan Balraj Mehta aren’t willing to give up just yet. The Delhi-based lawyer who was the first to move court against the Act is certain to fight till it “becomes more inclusive and weeds out clauses that’ve been arbitrarily inserted, depriving a section of people of their personal choice to have kids”. Mehta says, “It is also my constitutional right, and I must be allowed to exercise it.” Since his petition in the Delhi high court, many others have joined the legal battle. In August, a Chennai-based IVF specialist reportedly petitioned the Supreme Court against the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act, 2021 and Surrogacy Act claiming that the two imposed a “restrictive regime which gravely impinges upon the most basic reproductive right of individuals”. “I have been contacted by some people who are willing to explore similar options. Even international scholars have extended their support to us,” said Mehta. The next hearing in his case is on November 29. India’s restrictive law stands out as odd even more now, feels Dr Samit Sekhar, since many other countries are working towards lifting such discriminatory bans. In January this year, Israel, for instance, opened surrogacy to all its citizens – same-sex couples, single men and transgenders. Now, even Thailand is planning to follow suit. “Longing for a family cannot be restricted to heterosexual couples. Society and legislature must understand that even single men or queer couples are equally deserving of having a baby through fertility treatments such as surrogacy,” adds Dr Sekhar, owner and director of Kiran Infertility Centre with operations in Hyderabad and Bengaluru. Nithin*, a software engineer with an investment firm in Bengaluru, couldn’t agree more. In fact, the 31-year-old single man living with his mother asks if he must get married – despite his reservations – only to father a child? “Is being an honest, hardworking individual, who has enough to offer emotionally and financially not enough?” says Nithin. Dr Nayana Patel, IVF specialist and medical director of Akanksha Hospital and Research Institute, Anand (Gujarat) believes every case must be looked at practically, the gender and nature of relationship notwithstanding. “Since it involves the future of a child, we must follow a strict screening regime. But if the person/couple is stable, has a steady income and has every other necessary documentation in place, he/she/they should not be deterred from having a child,” she says appealing for a re-look at the Act. (*Some names changed to protect the identity of individuals)