Abstract This article advocates for consistent application of the best interests of children in recognition of legal parenthood of children born out of international surrogacy arrangements (ISAs) and opposes its differential application to surrogate children who do not have a genetic link to their intending parents (IPs). Owing to the lack of European consensus and specialized legal instruments regulating recognition of legal parenthood in ISAs, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR/the Court) via interpretation of Article 8 obligates prohibitionist home states of IPs to recognize legal parenthood coming out of such international arrangements only in instances where there is genetic link with one or both IPs. This leaves surrogate children with no genetic link to their IPs with no benefits stemming out of recognition of legal parentage often leaving them parentless and stateless. This work challenges the necessity for such limitations through analysis of two ECtHR cases, the Mennesson v. France and the Paradiso and Campanelli v. Italy, where differential consideration of the best interests of children was based on presence or lack of genetic link respectively. It concludes that non-recognition of parenthood is a disproportionate measure to protect legitimate aims of prohibitionist home states and advocates for expansion of their implied positive obligations to protect the best interests of surrogate children with no genetic link to their IPs.

中文翻译：

---

是什么造就了父母？在国际代孕安排中挑战遗传联系对合法父母身份的重要性

摘要 本文主张一致适用儿童的最大利益，以承认国际代孕安排 (ISA) 所生儿童的合法父母身份，反对将其区别适用于与预期父母 (IP) 没有遗传联系的代孕儿童。 ）。由于缺乏欧洲共识和规范在 ISAs 中承认合法父母身份的专门法律文书，欧洲人权法院 (ECtHR/法院) 通过对第 8 条的解释，要求禁止主义的 IPs 母国承认来自此类的合法父母身份。国际安排仅在与一个或两个 IP 存在遗传联系的情况下。这使得与他们的 IP 没有遗传联系的代孕孩子没有因承认合法父母而带来的任何好处，这往往使他们失去父母和无国籍。这项工作通过分析两个 ECtHR 案例，即 Mennesson 诉法国和 Paradiso 和 Campanelli 诉意大利，挑战了这种限制的必要性，其中对儿童最大利益的不同考虑分别基于是否存在遗传联系。它的结论是，不承认父母身份是保护禁止主义母国合法目标的不相称的措施，并主张扩大其隐含的积极义务，以保护与其 IP 没有遗传联系的代孕儿童的最大利益。这项工作通过分析两个 ECtHR 案例，即 Mennesson 诉法国和 Paradiso 和 Campanelli 诉意大利，挑战了这种限制的必要性，其中对儿童最大利益的不同考虑分别基于是否存在遗传联系。它的结论是，不承认父母身份是保护禁止主义母国合法目标的不相称的措施，并主张扩大其隐含的积极义务，以保护与其 IP 没有遗传联系的代孕儿童的最大利益。这项工作通过分析两个 ECtHR 案例，即 Mennesson 诉法国和 Paradiso 和 Campanelli 诉意大利，挑战了这种限制的必要性，其中对儿童最大利益的不同考虑分别基于是否存在遗传联系。它的结论是，不承认父母身份是保护禁止主义母国合法目标的不相称的措施，并主张扩大其隐含的积极义务，以保护与其 IP 没有遗传联系的代孕儿童的最大利益。