The basic question here is who is a baby's mother, for purposes of Jewish law. If we count the egg donor as the mother, then the child would be non-Jewish and need to be converted; if we count the woman who carried the baby to term, the child is born Jewish. I don't know the full range of opinions on the issue (I believe there are those who hold either way), but R. Nachum Rabinovitch, an Israel Rosh Yeshiva (head of the Academy at Yeshivat Birkat Moshe in Maale Adumim) holds that the birth mother is the mother for all purposes. That would mean, in your case, that the child is Jewish, but it would also mean-- at least as radically-- that if a Jewish woman and her husband conceived a child in vitro and then had another Jewish woman carry the baby to term, the mother of halachic record would be the surrogate, for all purposes (such as, for a striking example, the question of which relatives the child would have to avoid in terms of incest prohibitions). I don't think a full consensus has been reached on the issue yet, but this possibility is highly intriguing, and will have significant ramifications for many areas of Jewish law, life, and relationships.
It is well known that Jewish identity follows the religious status of the mother. If the birth mother is Jewish, the child is Jewish. Thus according to all authorities, if a woman converts to Judaism before her baby is born, the child born is Jewish and no conversion is necessary. However, there is a dispute among the latest rabbinic authorities on the question of whether the birth mother or the egg donor determines the religious status of the baby. There are some authorities who hold that maternal relationship is established by conception rather than birth (cf. sources cited by Rabbi J. D. Bleich in “Test Tube Babies,” Jewish Bioethics, ed. Rosner and Bleich, 1979). But the majority opinion is that Jewish identity follows the religious status of the nurturing mother, that is, the mother who brought the baby to term. Consequently, if the birth mother is Jewish, the child is Jewish and no conversion is necessary.
The Halakhic discussion concerning the status of a child conceived through either IVF (In Vitro fertilization) or via donor eggs or surrogacy has a long history. While the particular technologies are modern, the ultimate sources reach back to the Biblical tale of Abraham and Sarah. There are a variety of Reform responsa related to this question that can be found through the online index at http://data.ccarnet.org/resp/tindex.html
Rabbi Mark Washofsky, in Jewish Living: A Guide to Contemporary Reform Practice, pg. 238, considers the various technologies that aid infertile couples who wish to conceive a child of their own, including IVF, artificial insemination, surrogacy and donor eggs, as medical techniques that ought to be considered as healing, a remedy for childlessness. Aware of the possible legal and moral complications, he nonetheless considers it an act taken in the service of a mitzvah.
The basic question, as both Rabbi Allen and Rothstein have indicated, is who counts as the birth mother. Rabbi Solomon Freehof, in his 1980 collection New Reform Responsa, pg. 213-218, considers the question of a transplanted ovum. He asks, “Does the fact that the body [of the fetus] matures in the womb of the wife have any bearing on the status of the child? If does, definitely….Since the tendency of the law is to emphasize the influence of paternity, and since the wife carries the child and, therefore, according to the law her status impresses itself upon the child, these constitute two reasons which the child herein question should be considered the offspring of the married couple.” His opinion echoes that of Orthodox authorities who infer that it is birth, rather than conception, which in all cases establishes the mother-child bond.
From a Reform point of view it seems clear that the child is to be considered the child of the Jewish mother in all respects and would not need to be converted.
Copyright 2014 all rights reserved. Jewish Values Online
N O T I C E
THE VIEWS EXPRESSED IN ANSWERS PROVIDED HEREIN ARE THOSE OF THE INDIVIDUAL JVO PANEL MEMBERS, AND DO NOT
NECESSARILY REFLECT OR REPRESENT THE VIEWS OF THE ORTHODOX, CONSERVATIVE OR REFORM MOVEMENTS, RESPECTIVELY.