Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Law Commission consulting on paid surrogacy in the UK

264 replies

PimmsnLemonade · 15/11/2018 09:32

Sorry, I've no share token:

www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/surrogate-mothers-could-be-allowed-to-charge-cash-gfktl290j

OP posts:
SophoclesTheFox · 15/11/2018 13:30

Pretty much the Same here, Lysistrata.

I’d no hope of ever managing to have a child under my own steam, but I don’t believe I have the right to ask another woman to undergo the risk and the pain for me, no matter how much I could afford to pay her. I was content to remain childless rather than do that, because it’s so against my principles.

EatPeanuts · 15/11/2018 13:26

Under his eye indeed.

Shudder.

HamiltonCork · 15/11/2018 13:24

Isn’t it odd that most right thinking people are horrified by puppy farms but the govt is genuinely condiser making selling babies legal.

VickyEadie · 15/11/2018 13:24

I don't like doom-mongering but I am starting to agree with those who say that we are in the middle of a massive backlash against women's rights, and that it is based on women's bodies.

Under his eye, eh? Dreadful idea, which I hope will never gain ground here.

Bowlofbabelfish · 15/11/2018 13:24

Shouldn’t I be allowed to do what I want with my body?

You can do what you want with your body. Go sign up for voluntary surrogacy today if you want. Your choice.

What’s not ok is PRESSURE to do it.

Why don’t we have paid organ donation?
Why don’t we have paid blood and plasma donation? Because money introduces pressure.

Both my pregnancies have caused significant permanent damage to my body. There are significant physical risks with a surrogacy. It’s unethical to introduce money because it will lead to exploitation.

So yes it’s your body and your choice - that’s kind of the point.

LemonJello · 15/11/2018 13:22

We knew this was likely to happen. So we need to get out ahead of it this time, before decisions are made in back rooms behind closed doors like before.

EatPeanuts · 15/11/2018 13:14

There are also significant health risks involved in surrogacy, which are underreported.

EatPeanuts · 15/11/2018 13:13

This is very worrying indeed, and it has been predicted to happen.

I don't like doom-mongering but I am starting to agree with those who say that we are in the middle of a massive backlash against women's rights, and that it is based on women's bodies.

Ineedacupofteadesperately · 15/11/2018 13:10

Yeah, you'd only be a surrogate for 9 months so it can never be a long term job. Unlikely you'd be able to do it repeatedly. Buyers wouldn't want you after a while either if you ever had any complications (there'd be younger models available with less miles on the clock). Bloody awful idea.

SuffragettesStruggledForThis · 15/11/2018 13:01

I would much rather act as a surrogate than go on benefits. Shouldn’t I be allowed to do what I want with my body?

That's not an absolute right. Someone (maybe even you) might prefer to sell a kidney than to go on benefits, but the reason why organ selling is not legal is because it is recognised that this results in exploitation of the poor. (You can say the poor are already being exploited, but this is an additional aspect.) It's treating people's actual bodies and their parts, not just their labour, as a sellable commodity. Same with paid surrogacy, where the 'buyers' (intended parents) are treating the surrogate as a human incubator.

Racecardriver · 15/11/2018 12:49

I think that it is good that they are considering it. Under reasonable controls it may be a good thing. I would much rather act as a surrogate than go on benefits. Shouldn’t I be allowed to do what I want with my body?

Bowlofbabelfish · 15/11/2018 12:44

Several posters on here have said this would be the next step. Women are having their rights systematically stripped away and we seem to be destined for spare parts and breeding potential.

On benefits? We will be sanctioning you if you don’t take this perfectly good surrogacy gig...

We don’t allow paid organ transplants or paid blood donations because we know full well that as soon as you put money into the equation ethics and safety go out of the window. Surrogacy is no different. If it’s allowed at all it HAS to be purely altruistic.

Can we keep an eye on this for the inevitable consultation?

Lysistrataknowsherstuff · 15/11/2018 09:44

I hope the Law Commission actually read the contracts surrogates in the US have to sign. There are clauses in them that are horrendous - if the parents want to abort because of disability, if they want to reduce a multiple pregnancy to a single one, the surrogate has no choice about it. If she objects she has to repay all the costs of the IVF and has full responsibility for the baby (waives right to child support as well).

I can just about get on board with altruistic surrogacy for family members, but commercial? Nope. And I say that as someone who's childless (not by choice).

Procrastinator1 · 15/11/2018 09:35

Another move towards the commodification of women's bodies. Very worrying.