A/HRC/37/60 and many jurisdictions in the United States, have thus far failed to enact legislation concerning surrogacy, whether prohibitionist or permissive, leaving courts and competent authorities to develop their own responses to the developing practice of surrogacy.29 In the absence of surrogacy-specific laws, surrogacy arrangements are often completed using preexisting laws governing parentage, termination of parental rights and adoption. 30 Those jurisdictions which have legislated more explicitly as to surrogacy vary in the degree of comprehensiveness and clarity. The absence of clear and comprehensive laws addressing surrogacy can lead to unregulated commercial surrogacy developing, with accompanying exploitative practices.31 17. Intending parents often travel from jurisdictions prohibiting commercial surrogacy, such as Australia, France or Italy, to jurisdictions permitting commercial surrogacy, and then seek to return with surrogate-born children to their home jurisdiction. Such travel intentionally evades prohibitionist laws and creates dilemmas for the jurisdictions involved.32 Competent authorities and courts are often placed in the situation of being asked to validate, after the fact, international surrogacy arrangements that are illegal in one or both jurisdictions.33 The imperative to protect the rights of these surrogate-born children adds to the dilemma.34 Sympathy for intending parents and their wish to engage in family formation further complicates the issues. Concern for surrogate mothers, especially those who are exercising agency in contexts that often are particularly vulnerable to exploitation due to poverty, powerlessness, a lack of education, and multiple forms of discrimination, sharpens the dilemmas faced by States.35 18. International commercial surrogacy networks swiftly move from jurisdiction to jurisdiction as laws change. Indeed, sometimes in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer are conducted in one State, and then the surrogate mother is moved to a second State for the birth, with the intending parent(s) coming from a third State. 36 Hence, the need for the development and implementation of international standards is clear. 19. These unresolved dilemmas have created urgent concerns both for States and for the international community. Some are primarily concerned with the dilemmas and impact on human rights produced when international surrogacy is conducted to evade national prohibitions. Others are primarily concerned with abusive practices that can occur due to the lack of governing international and/or national law. From this perspective, the required solution is international and national legal frameworks that clearly regulate surrogacy.37 20. Some recommend legalizing and regulating both altruistic and commercial surrogacy. The hope is that legalization combined with a regulatory framework would protect the rights, dignity and interests of all parties, while avoiding the harms and violations of underground 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 6 Benjamin), available at www.federalcircuitcourt.gov.au/wps/wcm/connect/fccweb/reports-andpublications/speeches-conference-papers/2011/speech-pascoe-lawasia-2011. See Trimmings and Beaumont, pp. 5–24, 49–83, 167–174, 219–230, 247–253 and 391; and European Parliament, “A comparative study on the regime of surrogacy in EU member States” (2013), p. 206, available at www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document.html?reference=IPOLJURI_ET(2013)474403. Ibid. See sources cited in footnote 10 above; as well as Trimmings and Beaumont, p. 442; and HCCH, “A preliminary report on the issues arising from international surrogacy arrangements”. See HCCH, “A preliminary report on the issues arising from international surrogacy arrangements”, paras. 25, 28, 31 and 32; and the European Court of Human Rights — Mennesson v. France, application No. 65192/11, judgment of 26 June 2014; Labassee v. France, application No. 65941/11, judgment of 26 June 2014; and Paradiso and Campanelli v. Italy, application No. 25358/12, Grand Chamber judgment of 24 January 2017. See HCCH, “A study of legal parentage and the issues arising from international surrogacy arrangements”, para. 215. See Re X and Y (Foreign Surrogacy) [2008] EWHC 3030 (Fam), para. 22, per Justice Hedley. See HCCH, “A study of legal parentage and the issues arising from international surrogacy arrangements”. See Audrey Wilson, “How Asia’s surrogate mothers became a cross-border business”. See HCCH — “A preliminary report on the issues arising from international surrogacy arrangements” and “A study of legal parentage and the issues arising from international surrogacy arrangements”.