And so it came to pass: Mail on Sunday - gay male couple offered fertility treatment including surrogacy

I cant see I see much merit in those reasons, so I’ll have to agree to disagree.

Adopt because you want to adopt, not because it's the only option left.

Its a bit trickier in this circumstance but as someone who has heard "you could always adopt" so often, it's not always the answer and it's never simple.

AsdaCentralAisle cross post derail. Interesting case, thanks for the info

www.vice.com/en_uk/article/jmbqw7/natural-insemination-is-artificial-insemination-for-people-who-want-to-have-sex

In Dustin's podcasts he recoils at the thought of the surrogate providing the egg. This is for two reasons:

In the USA you can choose the egg donor from a catalogue. Particular physical features maybe but especially high IQ is valued.
I assume clever college students get to partially fund their fees by selling their eggs.

The person who chooses surrogacy as a career is unlikely to be part of that demographic.

This is so... I don't even have the words.

But I 100% believe that people who are buying a baby/use of a woman's body don't want to have to accept the genetics of the sort of person who would be desperate enough to have to do it. Why should the buyer not be able to choose every part of the women they want.

It's so twisted and sick.

Oxytocindeficient I'm not anti adoption at all, I was just listing the downsides as discussed on here

Chanbua, 22, in April unsuccessfully fought to claim custody of Pipah after learning David Farnell was a convicted paedophile.

During his judgment, Family Court of Western Australia Chief Judge Stephen Thackray said the Farnells had lied under oath about Wendy Farnell being the egg donor for the twins when the pair actually used an anonymous egg donor, together with David Farnell's sperm.
i.stuff.co.nz/world/australia/85811462/not-in-the-public-interest-farnells-escape-perjury-charge-over-baby-gammy-lie
They really bought a product didn't they? Then rejected the boy because he has Down's. Incidentally she is 50 in that article so there's a higher risk of Down's if she used her own egg anyway, right?
I'm glad for him that he's with his birth mother and money has been raised for him, but this link explains the Farnells tried to get at the fund too
i.stuff.co.nz/world/australia/71910671/null
I worry for the baby girl. What a start to life.

No idea if Wikipedia is accurate as the article quoted is behind a paywall but:

“It was ruled Pipah is not allowed to be alone with David Farnell and the agreement that she must be read a photobook with age appropriate language every three months for the foreseeable future that explains her father's offenses.”

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Thai_surrogacy_controversy

Anyway sorry for the derail! I’ll stop now.

Funkyfunky you don't need to have sex with a man to get pregnant, you just need the semen! Remember turkey baster jokes? It's not complicated. No need for a special clinic!

It did remind me of this story though where due to a reduction in sperm being donated, lesbians seeking semen in order to get pregnant are being pressured into conceiving "naturally" by men on the net I'll try to find it.

Seems to me that when it comes to sex and reproduction a large minority of men just can't help / see anythign wrong with trying to exploit women TBH

FlyingOink hmmm then no adoption, ever? I cant see I see much merit in those reasons, so I’ll have to agree to disagree. I’ve known plenty of families with adoption and despite the challenges, including open adoption, and they’re all loving families. Not perfect, but the children are cherished like any other.

the anxiety felt for the health of the babies, and by the tensions that arise when a woman's body is rented for the benefit of others and where the unit of exchange is measured in the life of a new human being
Sensible words by the judge. I wonder why they let him keep the girl when he is a child molester? Presumably the girl went straight on an at-risk register?

IVF should only be used if the surrogate can't get pregnant naturally, surely? Have they tried?

I think nearly all surrogacy is done through IVF clinics, not the surrogate sleeping with the father of the child. It does also tend to be donor egg. If it was a heterosexual couple wanting to use a surrogate, would people be expecting that the surrogate has sex with the man?

There is a question here about use of NHS funds BUT the NHS is not sourcing a woman for them or anything like that. I presume they have a surrogate lined up, but want funding for the clinic process.

Sorry that’s not correct. The surrogate didn’t reject him, but she certainly couldn’t afford to raise a child.

What if the child is disabled and neither the surrogate nor the father/s want this 'faulty product', what then? What happens to the child?

This has happened IIRC. This seems to have been the legal outcome: www.google.nl/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-australia-36012320

I honestly don’t see why suggesting adoption instead of surrogacy is not a good idea
I'll summarise what I learned on previous threads.

• it's not fair on the adopted child to be the fulfilment of someone's wish rather than their own person
• it's hard for the adoptive parents as links with birth family are maintained nowadays (for the child's sake)
• most children in need of adoption have had some suffering (neglect or abuse) and need extra commitment (or are disabled and the same applies)
• people prefer their own genes, and it isn't fair for the child to be a compromise

Fleetwoodsnack, that's terrible.

The argument that you don't have a human right to a child could be used to argue against all fertility treatment

Well may be, but why not? I am old enough to remember the first "test tube baby". I thought it was wrong then and I still do. Possibly the only time my and The Catholic church's views coincided.

Since then we seem to have moved to ever more expensive and complicated ways to create babies which are a long way from unblocking a fallopian tube can to restore fertility and insemination by donor.

I am against all surrogacy regardless of the sex or sexual orientation of the party wanting a baby.

maintaining quality of life for people
The problem is, there will be someone who claims unless they have GRS they will kill themselves. Unless they have a child, they will kill themselves. Unless they have their ears pinned back. A boob job. Bariatric surgery.
Pain management is different.
Not having what you want in life isn't grounds to hold everyone else hostage by emotional blackmail.
We need to provide fewer NHS services and ensure those we do provide are top class. So you get what you need but someone else doesn't get what they want.
And then we need to examine how some people genuinely can't cope with not getting what they want, to the point where is really does affect their mental health.

Thanks Oink

There are so many children waiting to be adopted. I honestly don’t see why suggesting adoption instead of surrogacy is not a good idea.

No. Nope. Non. Nein.

This is wrong, wrong, wrong.

Why is everyone so entitled?! Adopt a child! Jesus flipping Christ.

I was with you till "just adopt".

Looking at the state of the nhs and how we treat older adults (ie with cancer- it's vastly different to younger people) I'm firmly in the "no IVF at all camp". As has been said over and over having a child isn't a human right.

I understand it is loaded and difficult (trust me!) But we need to prioritise saving lives and maintaining quality of life for people.

Currently I'm being told drugs I have will be withdrawn as they're too expensive to only be "taking the edge off my pain". I was told this in an appointment where I was explaining pain made me feel suicidal.

I have a friend who is ineligible for ivf on the NHS because her husband has a child from a previous relationship.

She lost a Fallopian tube/ovary following ectopic pregnancy ten years ago.

Infertile, ineligible. This stinks.

Women broken down to their body parts to service the wants of consumerist men. No thought for the babies and their biological heritage. this.

And no recognition (or respect) for the bond between mother and child. A bond intimately developed over a 9 month period. All for sale with huge physical price for the women involved, and with no known positive effect for the child.

Ignorant a*holes.

I’ve been wondering for a while about the purpose of the survey carried out by Surrogacy UK that said the 65% of surrogates (who responded) wanted to give up their parental rights at birth.