A couple in India has expressed their joy after a landmark ruling by the Delhi High Court granted them access to their late son’s frozen semen, allowing them to pursue surrogacy and have a grandchild, as reported by The BBC.
This decision followed a four-year legal battle with a hospital that had initially refused their request.
Harbir Kaur and Gurvinder Singh lost their 30-year-old son, Preet Inder Singh, to Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma in September 2020. Before starting chemotherapy, doctors advised Preet to store his semen, as the treatment could potentially damage his fertility. Preet, who was unmarried, followed this advice, and his semen sample was frozen in June 2020. Following his death, the grief-stricken parents sought to retrieve the sample from Delhi’s Ganga Ram Hospital, but their request was denied.
Determined to continue their son’s legacy, the couple petitioned the Delhi High Court. They argued that they wished to raise a child born using Preet’s sperm and had already made arrangements for the child’s care within their family. Their daughters had even provided assurances to the court that they would take responsibility for the child if the couple passed away.
Last week, Justice Prathiba Singh ruled in favor of the couple, stating that Indian law does not prohibit posthumous reproduction if the deceased has given consent. She acknowledged that, as Preet was unmarried and had no children, his parents became his legal heirs under the Hindu Succession Act and were entitled to access the sperm sample.
The couple, now in their 60s, explained that this ruling offered them a chance to preserve their son’s memory and carry on the family name.
Their lawyer, Suruchii Aggarwal, noted that while this case is rare, it is not unprecedented. She cited similar cases in India and abroad, including one from 2018 where a mother in Pune used her deceased son’s sperm for surrogacy. Justice Singh, in her ruling, also referenced international examples, such as a 2002 case in Israel where parents were allowed to use their deceased son’s sperm to conceive a grandchild.
In court, Ganga Ram Hospital had argued that sperm samples could only be released to a spouse, as there were no clear guidelines for transferring them to legal heirs in the absence of a spouse or children. The Indian government also opposed the petition, pointing out that surrogacy laws in India are primarily intended to assist infertile couples or women, not those seeking grandchildren. Additionally, the Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Act 2021 prohibits single individuals from having children through surrogacy.
However, Aggarwal contended that Preet had given implied consent for the use of his sperm, as he had filled out a form stating it was for IVF purposes and included his father’s contact information. Justice Singh sided with this argument, concluding that Preet had intended for his sperm to be used to have children, and as his legal heirs, his parents were entitled to use the sample.
Following the ruling, the family is now considering surrogacy, with a relative agreeing to act as the surrogate.
Culled from todaysfamilylawyer
