Made in India (2010)
The film begins in San Antonio, Texas, where Lisa Switzer drives the open highways, talking about her seven-year struggle with infertility. As Lisa was forced to have a hysterectomy, surrogacy is her and her husband's only option to have their own child. We learn that even though the Switzers live in an attractive suburban neighbourhood, they cannot afford the $70,000 plus price tag of an American surrogate. So, as has been the way with many a service in the last decade or so, they decide to source their surrogate from India, at a fraction of the cost.
The couple travels to Mumbai, where we see the striking difference between India and their homeland. We understand that poverty drives Aasia's choice to become a surrogate when we meet her in her shanty-house.
As the story progresses we encounter issues of surrogate rights and informed consent, as Aasia encounters difficulties including stigma, dodging her husband's authority, complications during the pregnancy and a discrepancy in payment. The Switzers must also fight a battle for their parental rights with the hospital since surrogacy laws and regulations remain undefined. The larger issues of women's right to choose, science versus God, and ethics are also touched upon.
Haimowitz and Sinha manage to give a fairly objective picture of what outsourcing a surrogate can be like. Their choice to show one couple rather than generalizing the issue makes this objectivity possible. We see the points of view of both the parents and the surrogate. The Switzers look for the positives in the situation, believing that they will get their child and Aasia will get money that can bring her a better life. But this faith is shown as a bit naïve since in actuality the money makes very little difference in Aasia's day-to-day experience. This unsettling realization is compacted by the ending remarks about the growth of this practise into a global industry. One wonders if other surrogates and prospective parents in a similar situation come out as relatively unscathed or whether it is more common to have disappointment on one side or the other.
The film is not flashy by any means. Instead it follows a simple documentary style with lots of interviews, a few statistics and a surprising story that unfolds as it happens. The added commentary from industry workers including the Planet Hospital representative, doctors, lawyers, and a women's advocacy group is informative. The presentation of these varying perspectives provokes questions rather than giving all the answers. The viewer will leave the film wondering whether surrogacy of this kind is ethical. How can we better protect the rights of parents and surrogates? Is it appropriate to put a price on life and if so, what should be the sum? Most importantly the viewer's curiosity is piqued to find out more about the outsourcing of surrogates because, if this is what happened with one couple/surrogate, what about all the others?
The film begins in San Antonio, Texas, where Lisa Switzer drives the open highways, talking about her seven-year struggle with infertility. As Lisa was forced to have a hysterectomy, surrogacy is her and her husband's only option to have their own child. We learn that even though the Switzers live in an attractive suburban neighbourhood, they cannot afford the $70,000 plus price tag of an American surrogate. So, as has been the way with many a service in the last decade or so, they decide to source their surrogate from India, at a fraction of the cost.
The couple travels to Mumbai, where we see the striking difference between India and their homeland. We understand that poverty drives Aasia's choice to become a surrogate when we meet her in her shanty-house.
As the story progresses we encounter issues of surrogate rights and informed consent, as Aasia encounters difficulties including stigma, dodging her husband's authority, complications during the pregnancy and a discrepancy in payment. The Switzers must also fight a battle for their parental rights with the hospital since surrogacy laws and regulations remain undefined. The larger issues of women's right to choose, science versus God, and ethics are also touched upon.
Haimowitz and Sinha manage to give a fairly objective picture of what outsourcing a surrogate can be like. Their choice to show one couple rather than generalizing the issue makes this objectivity possible. We see the points of view of both the parents and the surrogate. The Switzers look for the positives in the situation, believing that they will get their child and Aasia will get money that can bring her a better life. But this faith is shown as a bit naïve since in actuality the money makes very little difference in Aasia's day-to-day experience. This unsettling realization is compacted by the ending remarks about the growth of this practise into a global industry. One wonders if other surrogates and prospective parents in a similar situation come out as relatively unscathed or whether it is more common to have disappointment on one side or the other.
The film is not flashy by any means. Instead it follows a simple documentary style with lots of interviews, a few statistics and a surprising story that unfolds as it happens. The added commentary from industry workers including the Planet Hospital representative, doctors, lawyers, and a women's advocacy group is informative. The presentation of these varying perspectives provokes questions rather than giving all the answers. The viewer will leave the film wondering whether surrogacy of this kind is ethical. How can we better protect the rights of parents and surrogates? Is it appropriate to put a price on life and if so, what should be the sum? Most importantly the viewer's curiosity is piqued to find out more about the outsourcing of surrogates because, if this is what happened with one couple/surrogate, what about all the others?
