Content area
Full text
I. Introduction
In March 2013, the controversial practice of surrogacy once again made headlines. CNN reported that Crystal Kelley, a woman who had contracted to act as a gestational surrogate carrier for an infertile couple, had refused to terminate the pregnancy, as the intended parents had requested.1 The request came at the five-month mark, after repeated ultrasounds revealed that the fetus suffered from multiple birth defects including a cleft palate, a brain cyst, and serious heart abnormalities that would require multiple surgeries upon birth and leave the child with only a twenty-five percent chance of having a "normal life."2 The intended parents, Stanislav and Vesselina Stoyanov, already had three special-needs children and wanted to spare another child from suffering.3 Kelley, who described herself as "always" against abortion, refused to terminate the pregnancy.4
The intended parents responded by offering to increase the fee for termination to $10,000 from the contractual amount of $2,000. Kelley made a counteroffer of $15,000, which the intended parents rejected."1 At that point, the intended parents' lawyer sent Kelley a demand letter insisting she terminate the pregnancy or face suit for breach of contract. The letter emphasized that time was of the essence, as the deadline for a legal abortion was fast approaching. Kelley responded via her lawyer that she would not be terminating the pregnancy. The Stoyanovs then proposed relinquishing the child to the State of Connecticut, pursuant to the Safe Haven for Newborns Act, if Kelley would not terminate the pregnancy.6 Kelley subsequently heeded her lawyer's advice to leave Connecticut for a place where she would be considered the legal mother once the baby was born.7 She chose Michigan, where surrogacy contracts are considered against public policy and void.8 Uninterested in parenting the child herself, Kelley arranged for a couple to adopt the child. Meanwhile, the Stoyanovs filed a petition in Connecticut seeking to assert their parental rights. The pleadings revealed, for the first time, that the intended parents had used an egg donor.9
Ultimately, the case was settled. The intended parents agreed to allow the adoption to go forward. As expected, the child, known as Baby S., was born with significant birth defects, including a failure of the brain to divide, misplaced internal organs, two spleens (neither properly...