Some disjointed thoughts and questions about surrogacy and feminism

No not interedting DJ Sperm donors can get up to £35 to cover expenses- no guarantee they will get £35.

Egg donors can get up to £750.

Egg donation & egg sharing - HFEA
www.hfea.gov.uk/egg-donation-and-egg-sharing.html

Men are paid to donate sperm in the UK? Interesting. Blood and egg donors are not.

southpole didn't you read where I said "i think if it's for a sister or best friend, I can see its a lovely thing for both parties.".

Quite apart from the ethical issues it also seems very unwise to choose a 'cut price' surrogate to carry your child. Maternal health has a big impact on babies and poverty has massive health impacts. I know there are agencies which essentially lock up the women in order to mitigate some of that (which is particularly unpleasant) but you can't really wipe out a life time of sub optimal nutrition and poor health care can you?

It's lovely that you wanted to do that for your friends SouthPole. I can't imagine anyone saying otherwise. Very different to commercial surrogacy though I think, no one bought your body or a period of your life, you gave freely to people you love.

@BigDeskBob - we would be what you might consider a well-off family and I made the choice to carry my friends' embryo to birth for them.

It's also not illegal in this country, though advertising and payment over the odds is, thereby shutting down any thoughts of a commercial surrogacy system like the US. Sorry I can't link to the posted who said that it was illegal.

But you are right, there's A LOT not right with going to what you know to be a poor country to do it.

With all the will in the world you must know that that's not completely her choice - circumstances have dictated this to be a road she's considering - probably for her own family's sake. But they're taken away often from their family for the 9months to live communally.

My circumstances are the absolute opposite and I just wanted to do a good thing for my friends who I love.

Also, is it weird I never really did like pregnancy after my first!!

I'm a surrogate.

Had my second surrogate baby yesterday via section for my (straight) friends and now just waiting for pain relief to kick in before I drift off once more.

I'm also a feminist, sometimes quite a radical one. A mother of three of my own and a solicitor on the road to partnership and a wife.

They aren't mutually exclusive.

I have loved giving my friends their children. It has thrilled me and apart from my own littles, is without doubt the best thing my family and I did - coz trust me, without the husband this wouldn't have happened.

Scottishdiem, gay men are not, in general, infertile.

Men can't give birth. It has nothing to do with them being infertile.

Egg donation has its own set of moral issues, whether the egg donation is so that a woman can carry a child herself or if it is to be implanted in a surrogate mother for a gay or straight couple. But egg donation is not of the same level of invasiveness, health risks and potential exploitation as surrogacy.

Lots of white American women choose to be commercial surrogates. I wouldn't say they are coerced or exploited. I suppose it depends on how much choice the surrogate has really.

There are a number of important issues around exploitation that are important but "They are both men, and they need to come to term with the facts that men cannot give birth" whilst true can also be applied to women who have fertility issues. Yet we have IVF and egg donation to address this. Should some women not just accept their natural infertility as we expect gay men to?

As always, Glosswitch has the answer:

www.newstatesman.com/politics/feminism/2016/02/paid-surrogacy-makes-disadvantaged-women-walking-wombs-unacceptable

www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/05/feminist-history-surrogacy-how-much-right-should-pregnancy-give-woman-over-baby

I once read an article and a couple who had used a surrogate mother used the phrase "gestational carrier" and it utterly revolted me. A woman carried and gave birth to their beautiful baby and she was given some creepy, dehumanising name.

Well, sperm donation has been about for years. You could argue that is commodification too, though lower level

In the U.K donors can get up to £35 to cover expenses/ time off from work etc so hardly an incentive. And it is "up to" not automatically £35.

Generally, if something is banned in the UK there is a good reason for it

That's a good point.

Fear of homophobia is a red herring, if your point of contention is the exploitation of poor women, the same applies to heterosexual couples seeking surrogacy. You are just being consistent.

pickle, there is a fundamental asymmetry in that sperm donation poses no risk to life or health whatsoever.

Having been through IVF, I'd also point out that egg harvesting is a highly invasive procedure with health risks attached - including ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, a side effect which can in rare cases be fatal. In no way comparable to wanking into a pot.

I think the dodgyness of that comes from the genetic connection though pickle. Not from sperm production and donation being a huge investment of time and energy, risking the very life of the donor. Pregnancy and sperm donation are separate issues. Sperm donation is more comparable to egg donation (which again is more exploitative than sperm donation but a lesser league than pregnancy).

I mainly agree Vestal, but wonder if the ethics of non philanthropical sperm donation is also a bit dodgy. It was often used as a fundraiser by poverty stricken men. Perhaps still is in the us? It still suggests an entitlement to children, to me. Of course the insult and invasion of women's bodies is of a higher order all together.

I have some very good friends who have just got married and they are looking into surrogacy in order to start their family. They are both men.

They are both men, and they need to come to term with the facts that men cannot give birth, and therefore won't be able to have biological children unless they happen to be friends with a lesbian couple who needs sperm donors.

It is no wonder that the massive entitlement involved in them wanting to start "their family" makes you uncomfortable.

This is the exact same attitude that I strongly suspect is the very root of patriarchy. Men feeling entitled to children. That's why they started enslaving women. Not just to raise any child, but to use women's bodies to make more of themselves.

And quite probably, that's why patriarchy is okay with gay men now: Because they now, that sex is no longer required for reproduction, gay men are eager to participate in the oppression of women.

Well, sperm donation has been about for years. You could argue that is commodification too, though lower level.

Um, no. Sperm donation is nothing like it. Sperm is a waste product that teenage boys produce in excess and throw into the wastebin every day.

You could call as well call it "commodification" when human feces are used to fertilizer - which is done in most low-tech agricultural societies.

Well, sperm donation has been about for years. You could argue that is commodification too, though lower level.

And no, what you say makes perfect sense OP. Women are incubators, uterus bearers and hosts, to both right and left.

I agree. It's commercial exploitation of poor women. The only surrogacy that is acceptable is wholly altruistic by someone known to you.

I do consider paid surrogacy to be exploitation. I suppose it is very similar to the would you donate a kidney argument actually. You might choose to do it for a close friend or relative. There may be a few people who would donate altruistically to a stranger (?) but if someone is paying you £20000 for a kidney it's exploitation.

What are the laws on traveling abroad for that sort of surgery? Is it legal? I think that overseas surrogacy should be illegal anyway. It is almost impossible for it to be ethical.