A Breakdown of Current state legislation vs ALRC proposals

Currently each state and territory has its own rules, its own definitions and its own view on what counts as a reasonable expense. The Australian Law Reform Commission is proposing a unified national model that would replace this mix with a single, clearer framework.

Below is a table outlining the key elements and how they will be harmonised.

NSW and Queensland are already closest to the Australian Law Reform Commission’s proposed national model, particularly around loss of income and insurance.

Western Australia is currently the most restrictive and would see the biggest changes. Victoria would need structural alignment because surrogacy sits inside its broader assisted reproduction framework.

The ACT and Northern Territory are newer systems and are already modernising. South Australia and Tasmania sit somewhere in the middle, and would mostly benefit from clearer rules rather than major philosophical shifts.

Area State Legislation ALRC Proposal
Basic medical costs Allowed as “reasonable expenses”, but definitions differ between states Explicitly required and nationally consistent
Counselling Generally permitted, but inconsistently defined Mandatory and clearly covered before and during the arrangement
Legal advice Usually allowed but not uniformly enforced Mandatory, with clear standards
Travel for medical appointments Not consistently covered or clearly defined Explicitly covered
Accommodation for treatment or birth Generally not clearly provided for Explicitly covered
Pregnancy supplements and dietary items Not consistently included Explicitly covered
Loss of income Mostly not allowed or unclear Explicitly covered, including partial and total loss
Superannuation Not covered in state laws Explicitly covered
Childcare and care of dependants Sometimes allowed, but inconsistent Explicitly covered
Domestic support (cleaning, meal services) Not clearly allowed Explicitly covered
Birth support costs Not clearly regulated Explicitly covered
Post-birth medical care (physical and psychological) Inconsistent and limited Explicitly covered
Health insurance for surrogate Not required Mandatory and paid for by intended parents
Life insurance for surrogate Not required Mandatory and paid for by intended parents
Income protection insurance Not required Mandatory and paid for by intended parents
Hardship payments for pain and risk Illegal under current law Permitted, capped, and legally recognised
Payments for serious complications Illegal Permitted where extraordinary medical harm occurs
Use of trust account for expenses Not required Required, managed by regulator, SSO or lawyer
National consistency No Yes, through harmonised national framework