Surrogacy

@Jessy85
... abortion... is acceptable in... truly desperate situation[s]

What do you consider to be a truly desperate situation?

It allows women with faulty reproductive systems to pass on their genes for a faulty reproductive system to the next generation.

So... Infertility = Faulty Woman-genes? That sounds like my 66yr old father. "You can't help it that your body is defective", without knowing why we are struggling with TTC. FYI, genes often have nothing to do with fertility issues and often it isn't primarily the female body that fails (or at all). Chew on that a minute... I'll wait. Two healthy fertile people (one m and one f) can have sex and not yield a pregnancy - 50% of all fertilized eggs are lost before a missed menses. Infertility is a generic all-encompassing term for those TTC who haven't been successful over a two-year period.

StopthePlanet Good luck with the next round of IVF. Wishing you success.

@Iused2BanOptimist

Thank you, and yes it cuts deeper than I knew was possible.

Our love is bigger than we are - it helps keep us honest. We could not look each other in the eyes knowing we compromised who we are to become parents. After all, what kind of parents could we be if we would compromise our principles before getting started? We can't rationalize away such a means to get our desired ends.

We are happy, we create it ourselves. Peace is harder and out of reach for now, we find solace in hope and in sharing this journey. We have one more 'official' try in us and then we will celebrate or seek peace.

In most ways I'm politically left-wing but surrogacy is one of those things that 'woke' people seem to assume I'm fine with that I'm not (same as calling biologically male transgenders 'women' and thinking of abortion as something that is acceptable in anything other than a truly desperate situation).

Surrogacy exploits the woman who carries the child. It separates the child from the woman who carried it in a cynical, completely intentional way. It allows women with faulty reproductive systems to pass on their genes for a faulty reproductive system to the next generation.

I can accept the 'laziness' of wanting to have a baby without having to go through pregnancy/birth, since many don't enjoy the experience of being pregnant and giving birth. Everything else about it sickens me.

This cuts across lots of modern supposedly woke stuff - taking attitudes that are seen as oppressive / regressive and repackaging them as choice and modern and marvellous. Same deal with "sex work".

I think a lot of the reason women/ liberal feminists buy into this stuff is because it gives them a free pass to not take any action towards it, which is overwhelmingly the position female socialisation wants us to take. Tackling the problem is hard, declaring that there is no problem is easy. It's the "you can't fire me, I quit" of feminist positions. Not just big things like this, but I know so many relationships where the woman says "yes I do all the housework/ cooking/ childcare/ gave up work/ took his name on marriage etc etc but that's nothing to do with the patriarchy, I choose to do those things". And sure, some people do freely choose to do those things but for a lot of people saying it's their choice means they don't have to face any uncomfortable truths or challenge the status quo. Exploitation through prostitution, pornography, and surrogacy are huge problems that we are making very little headway on solving. Re-branding those things as progressive, empowering, and freely chosen throws a blanket over the lot and says "there ya go, fixed it".

FermatsTheorem

You spoke about lesbian couples who decide they would prefer for the biological father to be involved in the child's life.

Personally I don't think anyone should start the process of having a child deliberately planning for the father to not be involved in their life.

My DH plays a hugely important role and for my sons is a role model in a way that I am not. I think children often find it difficult without a father in their lives. Now if Dad has upped and left as all too often happens so be it, but I don't think it's ideal or to be planned for.

And it's 100 times worse in my opinion to plan for mothers to be excluded from the child's life. Because of the biological bond but also the different behaviour of women. I don't know if it's socially or biologically constructed or both but women tend to behave very differently with their children.

MenuPlant excellent post.

*So this in a way is like a modern version of that attitude. Rather than being given / obtaining a woman to control and to provide babies, whether literally or via social / religious norms, they can pay for a woman to do this.

This cuts across lots of modern supposedly woke stuff - taking attitudes that are seen as oppressive / regressive and repackaging them as choice and modern and marvellous. Same deal with "sex work". *

I was thinking the same thing but less articulately - women, historically, have been sold and bartered via arranged marriages, with the sole purpose of producing an heir and to bring wealth to a family. Now a man doesn't have to go to so much trouble. Just hire a surrogate. And yes, I realise of course that many women also use surrogates but isn't it another side of the same coin in many cases? The Kardashian who wants to keep their figure and stay the sexy wife while someone else has a baby for them. The older woman with a younger husband wanting to make sure he is able to have the family he deserves.

And who is thinking about the children? All these children who will grow up and find their parents bought them via the exploitation of some impoverished woman in the Far East? You can't exactly wrap that up in a narrative of "Mummy and Daddy wanted you so much and a kind lady agreed to have you for Mummy"...What will those children think when they grow up? The children of the Nepalese women left to take their chances in a post earthquake country while their fathers had them flown out via a chartered flight. I'm pretty sure I'd be appalled.

StopthePlanet. Thank you for your thoughtful posts. It must cut to the quick when you see other people using surrogates without a second thought, being glorified for it (if they are celebrities) whilst sticking to your principles brings you nothing. I really appreciate that you have chosen not to go down this route for all the right reasons. I hope you are happy and at peace.

@truthisarevolutionaryact

I take your kind words to heart, thank you. BTW, love your username (profoundly true and a fantastic reference).

StopThePlanet
Thank you for sharing your experiences. It's so important to hear what you have to say.

I think there are lots of questionable practices that go on within the realms of assisted conception - yes surrogacy but also IVF for post menopausal women (for reasons similar to those given by MenuPlant and also the practice of offering free or cheaper IVF to couples willing to donate embryos to other couples (I think this exploits vulnerable people and also disregards the feelings of potential children).

Thinking about it through the years and in general though

A lot of the time men do seem much more cavalier about kids than women - probably because they don't have all the physical risks etc

Thinking about very old men who father children - loads of famous examples - and the general reaction in the media seems to be wow he's still got it.

But these children will have their fathers die when they are v young. The children will be exposed to their parent being elderly / needing care / declining etc when they are young - the stage of life that is usually more the grandparent. That's awful for a child. But still they do it. That seems v much about not really considering the POV of the child.

Men have also sought to control women and girls all over the world and through history again because of wanting children, wanting it to be "theirs" etc and so on. This seems to be a preoccupation.

So this in a way is like a modern version of that attitude. Rather than being given / obtaining a woman to control and to provide babies, whether literally or via social / religious norms, they can pay for a woman to do this.

This cuts across lots of modern supposedly woke stuff - taking attitudes that are seen as oppressive / regressive and repackaging them as choice and modern and marvellous. Same deal with "sex work".

The reason so many people buy into it is because misogyny. And also probably because the risks and impact on women of bearing children is still invisibilised, not talked about, underplayed. And after all, it's what we are for.

The way that the human right to family life is being used as a reason that men must be allowed women to bear children for them, same as the amnesty "human right to sex" which boils down to men must be allowed women to have sex with, is very very troubling.

The child wasn't loved enough to consider the child's needs at birth before their want to be a parent though. That may sound harsh but it's true.

And agree with this 100% Paid surrogacy, at its centre, involves buying another human life. It is a form of slavery. A civilised society cannot tolerate slavery in any form

@JessicaWakefieldSVH I know that. But when you're personally involved with people who have done it it makes it very hard to deal with whatever your true feelings may be. I may object to surrogacy but the fact is now the child is here and loved. I can however object to them taking an activist approach to it!

This isn’t about whether or not they turn out to be great parents. This is about the ethics of surrogacy.

Agree Fermats.

I wish gay men would think more about considering "alternative family structures" - for instance, co-parenting with a lesbian couple who wanted someone to be the biological father and have an involvement in the child's life (okay, so the relationship they ended up having with the children might then be closer to "beloved uncles" than fathers in the normal, live-in sense of fathers, but it would still be a valuable one, and an honest one).

I also question how “great” a parent is, who would deliberately deprive another human of their most fundamental need and bond.

@Iused2BanOptimist DLB does have a lot of facts wrong about the Uk surrogacy so I'm told...

We should also have a ban in bringing home babies paid for in other countries for a start. I know of a gay couple who chose a specific country for their surrogate because it was “the cheapest” . They have bought two babies and brought each one back to Britain with no consequences.

I have some friends who are gay dads via surrogacy. I feel uncomfy about it in many ways but the child is loved and they are great parents. However they have started to become more vocal campaigners and when they bang on about gay people getting NHS funded IVF when there are women out there with multiple miscarriages etc who can't get it it makes me want to smack them. (Nb they paid privately for theirs but campaigning for others).

It is a form of slavery. A civilised society cannot tolerate slavery in any form.

^ this totally

Barracker
There is a buyer, AND a facilitator. It's those people you have to look at. This is now nothing to do with bodily autonomy, not for them. This is the opposite. It's about rights over someone else's body and whether we can or should grant that, in any circumstance, ever.
I think, never.
The commissioning of another human to be made for you? No.
The right to control someone else's body? No.
The right to claim a newborn from its mother? No.
These are the rights I object to.

This absolutely nails it.

And I think Baroness Warnock got it right back in the 80s when she chaired the first enquiry about this, which led to the UK's ban on paid surrogacy.

Paid surrogacy, at its centre, involves buying another human life. It is a form of slavery. A civilised society cannot tolerate slavery in any form.