The Western Australian Women’s Action Alliance (WAWAA) has formally written to all Members of the WA Parliament urging each of them individually to support the withdrawal of the Assisted Reproductive Technology and Surrogacy Bill 2025 and refer it to the Law Reform Commission of Western Australia as well as parliamentary committee for full scrutiny and review. This Bill, currently before Parliament, has been introduced without adequate consultation and is already at the second reading stage.
Listen to the 6-minute podcast episode:
That the Bill has been introduced via flawed process and absence of meaningful public engagement is not new for the state: in the past, WAWAA has registered similar protests around sex self-ID, even going so far as to lodge a special procedures request with the UN for lack of democratic process. But still more than this, the Bill is simply bad law: it is fundamentally misguided in its treatment of surrogacy and assisted reproductive technology (ART) as if they are one and the same.
Problems with process and exclusion of women’s voices
From the outset, the development of this Bill has sidelined women’s advocacy groups, independent experts, and feminist voices. Instead, the consultation process has been steered by representatives of the fertility industry and clinicians with clear commercial interests, and consisted only of limited stakeholder briefings. Crucially, there was no invitation to the Law Reform Commission of Western Australia for input, and neither was there transparent, open consultation required for significant social legislation — a point confirmed by government documents and health department consultation papers.
Conflict of interest and regulatory capture
A law that is meant to guide matters as sensitive and complex as ARTs and surrogacy should be built on rigorous, evidence-based review. Rather, the Bill emerged from a ministerial panel chaired by a leading ART clinician and populated by industry insiders — with no representation from women’s advocacy groups. This is a textbook example of regulatory and legislative capture, creating a framework that streamlines approval processes and supports commercial expansion rather than robust protection for women.
Surrogacy and ARTs cannot be treated the same
Perhaps the gravest flaw in this Bill, however, is the decision to merge surrogacy and ARTs into a single legal framework. These fields are fundamentally distinct: ARTs are medical treatments with specific risks and consent issues relevant to the patient, amongst other things; surrogacy involves complex ethical, legal, and social considerations, impacting women, both as individual surrogate mothers, and as a population requiring protection.
Bundling the two into one Bill masks these differences, limits scrutiny, and shifts the legislative focus away from the real risks and harms, particularly those faced by women. The language of the Bill and its explanatory materials is telling: it frames ‘access’ to both surrogacy and ARTs as a consumer right to be remedied by the removal of ‘barriers’, thus erasing considerations of the exploitation and commodification of women, and of the physical and psychological harm caused to women used in the practice.
Misleading harmonisation and ignoring best practice
The government claims harmonisation with other states as justification; yet most jurisdictions are using outdated law or are themselves engaged in ongoing reviews. Rather than setting a higher standard — such as Victoria’s evidence-based three-year Law Reform Commission process, which even then did not guarantee the protection of women used in surrogacy — Western Australia is rushing forward without full inquiry. This is also to ignore Australia’s obligations under international human rights instruments such as CEDAW and the ICCPR.
Evidence of harm and the need for genuine review
Extensive international and domestic evidence shows that surrogacy constitutes a form of violence against women, as recognised by the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls, and as pointed out in various AAWAA submissions. Australian data highlights the growing use of overseas commercial surrogacy arrangements, with inadequate enforcement and an alarming pattern of automatic legitimisation by the courts. Little-to-none of this has been properly factored into the WA Bill.
Direct call to Parliament
In light of these concerns, WAWAA has individually contacted every MLA and MLC in Western Australia seeking meaningful engagement. We are calling for the Bill to be withdrawn and subjected to independent review by the Law Reform Commission and robust committee scrutiny, with the full participation of women’s advocacy groups and independent voices. Any future process must be transparent, prioritise women’s human rights, and resist industry pressure. We urge all Members to reject this legislation until real scrutiny and consultation take place.
Read WAWAA’s letter, below, including evidence to support our claims.
