Advanced search

To think if you pay for a surrogate baby that you decide you don't want you should pay for the op he needs.

(564 Posts)
sashh Sat 02-Aug-14 07:14:54

An Australian couple have paid a Thai woman to be a surrogate, she had twins but one has Down Syndrome so they left him behind and took his sister home.

He has a hole in the heart (news reporting that it is in addition to DS, actually it is more likely part of the DS) and his mum can't afford his op.

Surely the least you can do is pay for his bloomin' op?

Obviously there should have been an agreement with who pays for what under what circumstances but in reality is a poor person in a developing country going to think about that?

Mumof3xox Sat 02-Aug-14 07:19:43

How terrible!

Surely the Australian parents should be responsible in some part!

And how awful for the twins

OneDreamOnly Sat 02-Aug-14 07:20:27

It's just disgraceful. That poor boy and that poor woman.
As if they would have had any choice if they had been able to carry the baby.

The thing is, it's not just the operation he needs now. It's al the rest that is going to come due to his SN. I'm not sure I want to know what it will mean for him to live on Thailand with DS.

limon Sat 02-Aug-14 07:20:56

That's just bloody awful sad mumsnet fundraiser?

chantico Sat 02-Aug-14 07:21:18

I've just heard this on the news. I just cannot see how you can leave one twin behind.

From the second link "A campaign on online fundraising site GoFundMe has already raised nearly $100,000" so I hope this little boy will be OK.

limon Sat 02-Aug-14 07:21:23

That's just bloody awful sad mumsnet fundraiser?

limon Sat 02-Aug-14 07:21:25

That's just bloody awful sad mumsnet fundraiser?

sashh Sat 02-Aug-14 07:21:45

Just found this. It looks like the Australian general public are trying to look out for him.

SoSoHappy2 Sat 02-Aug-14 07:23:45

If they're the kind of people who would do that, there is no way on earth I would've let the take one of the twins. What horrible heartless people.

MidniteScribbler Sat 02-Aug-14 07:24:51

These people are scum, absolute scum. There is simply no excuse for their behaviour, especially as being Australian citizens, if they adopted him, then the boy would be eligible for the operation to be done in the Australian health care system and it would cost nothing. I can imagine that the twin sister won't be too thrilled with them either when she is older and finds out.

Altinkum Sat 02-Aug-14 07:27:13

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

AlpacaLypse Sat 02-Aug-14 07:30:17

I'm not an expert on fertility etc. Is the little boy genetically the child of the two Australians?

If so I feel very sick and angry.

And not at all surprised the Thai government want to clamp down on being used as a cheap source of rent-a-womb services for arrogant wealthy people.

OneDreamOnly Sat 02-Aug-14 07:40:46

alpaca the blood relationship with the dc can or cannot be there. With a surrogate mother, you might have the father giving his sperm and they use an egg donor (usually it's not the surrogate mother) or use the mother egg and a sperm donor or the egg and the sperm might have been donated depending on the infertility. I think that in most cases, couples use a surrogate mother when the woman can't physically carry a baby (had an hysterectomy of uterine cancer). But the surrogate mother normally just carries the baby for 9 months.

I'm not either shocked or surprised about what this lady did. She clearly needed to money. I'm pretty sure that in the US there are some similar agreements. Just as you can go and have an anonymous egg donation in the Czech Republic. The women giving the egg are paid too.

KoalaDownUnder Sat 02-Aug-14 07:41:25

I am disgusted by this, as an Australian and just as a human being.

The Australian government needs to seriously look into the legalities around surrogacy agreements between Australian parents and Thai surrogates. There should be a way to criminally prosecute these 'parents' for child abandonment.

This case makes the entire surrogacy system look bad. It confirms the fears of people who are anti-surrogacy: that babies are treated like a consumer good that can be rejected as 'faulty'. Either the baby is yours from conception, or it isn't; there should be no back-out clause.

Shame on these parents, and on the agency that set up the surrogacy. They are preying on economically disadvantaged women.

Mumof3xox Sat 02-Aug-14 07:42:25

Have the couple been named? If not I think they need to be!

Edenviolet Sat 02-Aug-14 07:45:02

The agency are preying on economically disadvantaged women yes, but also desperate couples struggling with infertility.

wannaBe Sat 02-Aug-14 07:46:05

They are the lowest of the low and should not be allowed to be parents. The other baby should be removed IMO.

needaholidaynow Sat 02-Aug-14 07:50:34

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

sashh Sat 02-Aug-14 07:52:28

Not sure they should be named, not for them, but for their other child. Although I think she will end up with some emotional baggage when she is old enough to understand.

If the parents don't tell her she is going to find out, she is bound to look up her birth details at some point.

Edenviolet Sat 02-Aug-14 07:53:48

I couldn't leave a child behind like that but we don't know their circumstances. Its says in one article that at 4 months pregnant they wanted to terminate the pregnancy after getting the test results but the surrogate refused.
Obviously it clouds the issue as a third party was involved but if it was just the couple involved and they decided to terminate nobody would have judged them.

But, now the baby is actually here I do think it is cold hearted that they left him behind. I would not like to be in their position one day when his twin sister finds out exactly how cruel her parents were to her twin brother.

lougle Sat 02-Aug-14 07:53:52

It's interesting to see how strongly people feel about the couple rejecting a child with DS, when 92% of postnatally diagnosed foetuses with Down Syndrome are terminated after diagnosis.

I hope the baby gets the love and care he/she deserves. Dd1's best friend has DS and she's fantastic.

Finola1step Sat 02-Aug-14 07:57:34

According to Sky News, the Thai surrogate was injected with the Australian woman's fertilised egg. They then found out it was twins and more money was offered and accepted the surrogate to carry both. They then discovered that one baby had Downs Syndrome and the Australian couple wanted her to abort, she refused. Babies are born, baby without DS is taken by the couple back to Australia.

Dreadful situation. Those poor twins. It is now inevitable, I would have thought, that the girl twin will one day discover the truth. There is absolutely no excuse for their decision.

KoalaDownUnder Sat 02-Aug-14 07:59:11

Personally, I think it would be inhumane to force a pregnant woman to have a termination, even if she is carrying as a surrogate.

I don't know what the legal position is on that, though, or exactly what was in the contract drawn up by the agency.

Treaclepot Sat 02-Aug-14 08:01:29

Lougle I was think exactly the same thing. And a large percentage of DC with Down syndrome are twins. Which I've often wondered if that is because that would also result in terminating a nt child as well. (Obviously not in all cases).

AlpacaLypse Sat 02-Aug-14 08:02:40

The whole situation is a complete mess isn't it? Thanks for the succinct round-up Finola.

Surely in properly managed surrogacy arrangements every contingency is discussed in advance - like multiple birth and what to do if unborn child has life-changing disability?

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: