hinduja hospital: Hosp Seeks Dismissal Of Plea For Embryo Transfer | Mumbai News

Mumbai: Hinduja Hospital, seeking dismissal of a couple’s “misconceived” petition for transfer of their cryo frozen embryos, said “all IVF procedures are not surrogacy procedures and this had been explained to the petitioners”.
An affidavit filed by Dr Suganthi Iyer, deputy director of PD Hinduja Hospital and Medical Research Centre, denied the couple’s claim in their plea that the surrogacy process had begun in October 2021. Her affidavit said enforcement of the new Surrogacy Law began on January 25, 2022, and hence the petition seeking transfer of the frozen embryo from its facility to any other IVF center in the city to complete the surrogacy procedure allegedly stopped by the hospital, is not maintainable.
Dr Iyer said, “A good proportion of the in vitro fertilization comes under the assisted reproductive technology (ART) procedure.” The affidavit said, “it is also pertinent to note that the petitioners have been pressurizing the respondents for the transfer of the cryopreserved embryos…, contrary to the provisions of the Surrogacy Act.”
Dr Arti Adhe, consultant, IVF and gynecology, Hinduja Hospital, also filed her affidavit and similarly said the petition is misconceived and “should be summarily dismissed”.
Both affidavits filed through their advocate, Bruno Castellino, said the hospital’s IVF unit was only following the new law which stipulates that a national board has to approve any surrogacy, and in the absence of such a board, it was not possible to transfer the cryopreserved embryo to another clinic.
The couple had petitioned the HC to seek transfer of their own embryos as they desired to have a child and did not want their dream to be dashed.
On May 18, the HC’s vacation bench had called for affidavits in reply to the couple’s petition.
Dr Adhe said, “The IVF procedure conducted on December 24 last year was under the then prevailing ICMR guidelines. However, the potential surrogate candidate was not found to be medically fit for implantation and hence the procedure did not commence before the Acts came into the force.”
The new law prohibits commercial surrogacy but allows it for altruistic purposes.
The hospital said that it “is not denying the right of the petitioner to become a mother once again”.
It said it was “merely following the rules and procedures mentioned in the Acts which have strict penal provisions in case of any default by the clinic and/or the hospital”. It added that “formation of the IVF clinic in the hospital, is to help couples with medical conditions to bear child/children through the various fertilization procedures available, including surrogacy”.
When the matter came up before a bench of Justices SV Gangapurwala and Madhav Jamdar on Tuesday, Justice Jamdar recused himself and the bench said the matter will have to be heard by another bench now.