Guardian: the rise of “social” surrogacy

Both surrogacy and prostituion ought to be banned. The vast majority of women involved in it are exploided. The right of the "empowered" few should not trump the basic human rights of the many.

Yes, IIRC the surrogate was Thai and the intended parents Australian. She gave birth to B/G twins and one had Downs. The parents refused to take the boy with Downs and left him with the surrogate. Then it transpired that the father was a second offender, I think

not envy.

Bestial.

It really is analogous to prostitution

Yup.

Its proponents are pimps.

Lots of money to be made out of our unique production potential.

We produce the only asset they can't, of course.

Imagine if we said 'no'.

I'm sure there was a case that was publicised about a surrogate whose baby turned out to have a disablity and the 'buyers' decided they didn't want it - was it in SE Asia? and the buyers were Australian maybe?

It really is analogous to prostitution, only poor women will do it and yet the idea of 'bodily autonomy' is proposed as a feminist justification. Just because there might be a tiny percentage of women who engage in prostitution through choice and are undamaged by it (though I highly doubt that) doesn't mean we don't aim to legislate to protect the vast majority of women who ARE harmed by prostitution.
I get that in the UK we have altruistic surrogacy and I appreciate women are doing that with the best of intentions. But I worry about them and their babies...and their other children, too.

who is anyone to tell them they can’t do that?

The baby who is being created with the intention to separate it from its mother. Your scenario also doesn’t factor in the very crucial point being made that the two women aren’t usually equals, one has greater wealth and choice, one has to sell her body and risk her health. If it’s altruistic you can’t really stop them but it’s not something I encourage or agree with because of the separation of mother and child.

On the other hand, I’m a huge fighter of a woman’s right to body autonomy, if a woman doesn’t want to carry her child and if another woman is happy to carry a baby for her, they are both consenting adults making a decision about their own bodies, who is anyone to tell them they can’t do that
Pimp.

boobless you should read the thread on universal credit and what extreme poverty forces women to do (sell their bodies) and that might help you decide. We are seeing very poor women in developing countries being used as incubators and sometimes being left with the baby if it’s not perfect enough. I’m sure women are also suffering permanent damage to their health due to being surrogates. I can’t reconcile that renting your womb for 9 months is the same as having ‘body autonomy’

I’m really on the fence about my personal opinion on surrogacy. On one hand, it does seem wrong to pay or ask another woman to do a dangerous thing for your benefit.
On the other hand, I’m a huge fighter of a woman’s right to body autonomy, if a woman doesn’t want to carry her child and if another woman is happy to carry a baby for her, they are both consenting adults making a decision about their own bodies, who is anyone to tell them they can’t do that?

Well, it just made me think of when June was pregnant in THT. Everyone was so concerned - relatively speaking - about her health, making sure she had good food and was spared any physical punishments. But of course it wasn't June they were concerned about, it was the baby she was carrying, the baby who was to be stolen from her the moment she had given birth. And once she had, no more concern for her health was shown. She was just a human incubator.

Is it Handmaid’s Tale? I think it’s more like Never Let Me Go, but instead of someone being kept in hospital until all their organs have been harvested until they’re of no more use, it’s a baby instead.

Let’s be clear what this bit is saying: the intended parents get to keep the body of a woman warm and functional until a baby can be cut out of her safely, after which it’s not their problem any more.

And some people say "The Handmaid's Tale" is unbelievable....

But if your living is your look, then it's has to be a factor in your decision making

So then why did KK have two (I think) children in the usual manner and then chose a surrogate for the third? If it's just about having children, she already had some, if it's about the body changes, she already went through that twice.
Why are the media so concerned about womens bodies looking perfect while pregnant. why wont the press leave these women alone to look fat after a birth, to look haggard after 3 months.
Why do all these women "bounce back" into shape and are lauded for doing so in 6 weeks? It's not a crime to have a mum tum, not be made up and perfectly dressed when the baby is small.

A baby is not a right. You dont get to have one just because you want one. Not everyone is cut out for parenthood and that's ok too.

And to copy one segment of that link, an example of a clause written in a surrogacy contract:

If the surrogate is in her second or third trimester of pregnancy and in the event that medical life support equipment is required to preserve and maintain the life of the Surrogate and if requested by the Intended Parents, the Surrogate and her husband agree that the Surrogate’s life will be sustained with life support equipment for a period to achieve viability of the fetus taking into account the best interests and well-being of the fetus . . . The Intended Parents will make the decision with regard to how long the life support should be continued prior to the birth of the Child taking into account the obstetrician or perinatologist’s recommendation and the desires of the family of the Surrogate. The Surrogate’s husband, or her next of kin, is solely responsible for determining the time at which life support treatment will be discontinued following the birth of the Child.

Let’s be clear what this bit is saying: the intended parents get to keep the body of a woman warm and functional until a baby can be cut out of her safely, after which it’s not their problem any more.

Just sickening.

FannyCann

That first link is informative but absolutely chilling. Thank you. I hope people like Newuseroftheweek read it.

Intentionally creating a child to be separated from its mother is wrong and I don’t support it, for altruistic reasons or commercial.

Exactly.

And at some point that child is going to have to be told that the woman who carried and gave birth to him or her sold them. There's no knowing what effects that might have on the child's well-being.

And before someone mentions adoption, please don't. They are two very different scenarios.

Some of the "what if" scenarios up thread are addressed here.

www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2017/11/20390/

I think "what if" the health/life of the surrogate are permanently damaged is one of the scenarios that isn't addressed as these contracts are all about protecting the buyer intended parents and ensuring they get their baby.

Maternal death is uncommon these days (although the USA has about the worst rates in the developed world and getting worse), presumably surrogates get good antenatal/obstetric care as it is in the interests of the IPs and will be in the contract.
But anyone wanting to take a look at bad things that can happen should cruise over to the confidential enquiries into maternal mortality that are released every three years in the UK. Pregnancy and childbirth are not risk free.

www.npeu.ox.ac.uk/mbrrace-uk/reports

www.hqip.org.uk/resource/mbrrace-uk-perinatal-mortality-surveillance-report-2018/

And something/someone practically no one gives consideration to is the egg donor.
This is not a pleasant procedure to go through and also carries risks. Only this week I have had dealings with a young woman who ended up in ICU after egg collection.

Finally they had a big open discussion by the editor about what could be done to make the comment sections better, and it was universally, stop moderating in such a biased way. Ironically there were scads of deletions from the discussion.

I must have missed that discussion - sounds interesting!

And yes, the moderation 'policy' clearly goes way beyond their stated 'community standards'. I guess it's their playground and they can do what they want, but it doesn't make them look good if they're deleting comments simply because they find them distasteful even though they conform to their own 'standards'. I used to think that they'd stopped opening articles to comments to save money on paying moderators, but now they've started pre-moderating a lot, which would be even more labour intensive.

I’d also like to know the cut off age for buying and selling humans?

The fact so many poor women are used by rich women who want to avoid the risk and complications of pregnancy and birth, just makes it even worse.

Yes yes. It won’t ever be a rich woman who does this for money, because why would they? Even IF all of the ethical considerations and hypothetical scenarios I’ve posted could be successfully covered in the best legal contract ever created that didn’t leave ANY ambiguity whatsoever , let’s say there WAS a dispute. Who is going to prevail, legally? The side that can afford the best legal advice.

Intentionally creating a child to be separated from its mother is wrong and I don’t support it, for altruistic reasons or commercial. It isn’t just about how gross it is to use women’s bodies this way, it’s also about the child. The fact so many poor women are used by rich women who want to avoid the risk and complications of pregnancy and birth, just makes it even worse.

it won't be easy

I realised that. I still don't know what it is supposed to mean.

Another issue is that if this becomes a possibility for people, it isn't just a choice, the possibility shapes behaviour.

So an actress now, instead of losing her figure, can pay money and avoid it. A career woman can avoid losing time at the office. If these things become normalised very quickly they can become expectations. Sorry, we don't hire actresses with stretch marks. No, if you are sick because you are pregnant and need rime off, you have no future here.