Current regulation that prevents same-sex male couples from accessing public funding to become parents is outdated and discriminatory, according to a leading New Zealand fertility clinic.
Repromed said that under current law, only men with azoospermia (no sperm) were eligible for the waitlist for assisted reproductive technologies, which meant most same-sex male couples had to pay for private treatment instead.
But the big problem was a lack of funding, with no increase to publicly-funded assisted reproductive technologies since 2006, which restricted the number of patients fertility specialists could take on.
"We should look at making it more equitable for all clients from the rainbow community and in the non-rainbow community," Repromed medical director Devashana Gupta said.
"Unfortunately, that does come down to the bottom dollar and there needs to be a push towards increasing the funding. With the new Government, hopefully, we might see some change."
Couple Jonathan Trenberth and Joshua Martyn have embarked on the journey towards parenthood, finding an egg donor — Jonathan's sister — and a surrogate to carry the child to term who already had her own family.
But, by the time they get to that stage of pregnancy, they estimate the process would have cost them around $40,000.
"A lot of families won't have that option to deprioritise other things like we do. That makes me sad because they are going to miss out on something that I believe is a right," Martyn said.
The pair were going ahead with the process regardless of the cost but have to cut back on spending on other things to make it happen.
"To have laws that are so archaic and old, and obviously discriminatory to a same-sex male couples, is really disheartening," Trenberth said.
Barriers to public funding also existed for same-sex female couples, who needed to go through several private rounds of treatment before they were eligible.
In a statement, Te Whatu Ora Health New Zealand said there were no plans to increase funding.
However, it said any variation found to exist in access across Aotearoa would be addressed as they were identified and moved into planning processes because DHBs were historically-commissioned and held the contracts with third parties.
Repromed says outdated surrogacy laws also created problems for same-sex male couples after their child was born.
Currently, the almost 70-year-old surrogacy law requires intended parents to adopt their child at birth from the surrogate. The surrogate was still the child's legal parent until the adoption was completed.
Martyn says that had been one of the most difficult steps.
"Talking to Oranga Tamariki about the process of adopting our baby was probably one of the most disheartening conversations I've ever had," he said.
"The notion [that] it is an application that may be approved is a horrible thing to get your head around, because that implies that it may not be approved."
The previous government attempted to update the law, putting forward the Improving Arrangements for Surrogacy Bill, but it was not passed before the election.
1News asked the new Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith whether the bill would be looked at again. In a statement, he said the Government was currently focused on delivering the 100 Day Action Plan, and decisions on the bill would be made in due course.
Trenberth said the slow pace of change was frustrating.
"Why is it New Zealand's laws are so archaic, and we haven't done anything about it yet?" Trenberth said.
For Martyn, it meant pushing harder to make the dream of having a family happen.
"For anyone who's had a child, I bet looking back on it there's nothing they wouldn't spend, so we are looking at it as if this is a defining part of our life."
SHARE ME