MN editorial on how wonderful surrogacy is

There is an unpleasant implication from some of the posters on this thread that women who object to surrogacy have no personal experience of infertility, assuming that we would put all our moral objections aside if we were faced with a future without biological children.

It's insulting and it's wrong.

^This.

Goosefoot I think this is important because where an editorial is unsigned it is always a reflection of the official view of the publication (or website). Is this strongly pro surrogacy view the official @MNHQ line on this very controversial and problematic topic?

Maybe, I don't know. I think sometimes there isn't an official view as such. If I were to guess (and it is a guess) I would say that MNHQ probably sees itself as providing information on any legal activities relating to motherhood without a lot of philosophical introspection about them. So if your family is one that involves a same sex couple, or a polyamorous co-op, or surrogacy, or international adoption, and whatever, they want those people to come to MN and won't take an official view against them.

They don't restrict discussion of the issues around surrogacy though, which is something.

We are in kind of a weird place culturally. Clearly what is legal is not the same as what is right, and to decide what ought to be legal there has to be some larger moral framework. But we seem to struggle to define what that might be for the purposes of discussion that involves the public as a whole. As a result, a lot of people and many organisations seem to default to what is legal to define what is good, and it becomes a circular argument.

So I don't see organisations like MN as the real problem, they are stuck in a difficulty that we have as a larger culture.

vimeo.com/125756487

J Kern also writes "When you know that a huge part of the reason that you came into the world is due solely to a paycheck, and that after being paid you are disposable, given away and never thought of again, it impacts how you view yourself."

thembeforeus.com/jessica-kern/

The fourth trimester is also a known thing. You are depriving babies of a fourth trimester. Lots of countries have banned it - have a look into why. It's largely to do with the rights of the child, though the exploitation of women is also a factor.

There is an unpleasant implication from some of the posters on this thread that women who object to surrogacy have no personal experience of infertility, assuming that we would put all our moral objections aside if we were faced with a future without biological children.

It's insulting and it's wrong.

I was diagnosed with gynae cancer during IVF.
This likely saved my life though also put an end to our hopes tohave children.

My permanent infertility was sudden and abrupt though working through what that meant came after the shock & trauma of the neccessary treatments.

I had to work through my feelings & beliefs about surrogacy & having considered & questioned them deeply find the promotion of commercial surrogacy absolutely wrong.

. I still don't think that justifies the harm to the child.

Are there studies that show it's harmful to the children though? I've asked that several times on here. Is it known to be detrimental to the children?

But that's what I'm saying - it's the not accepting it that drives people to look at donor eggs/sperm and surrogacy or adoption.

What I don't know is how you move people away from that non acceptance and towards being able to accept it.

For sure it's not as easy as just saying "you need to accept it".

OK, but people aren't trying to accept it, they're trying to buy babies and risk huge complications for everyone instead. Better mental health provision would help and yes, there will be some who will never accept it. I still don't think that justifies the harm to the child.

Surrogacy is clearly driven by people who don't care about human suffering whatever the cause, it is driven by people who want to make money.

I think there is a biological drive to have children, but if women can't I really don't think it's healthy for anyone to have this attitude that they must have a child no matter the costs. It is possible to be in the life of children in a meaningful way even if you don't have them yourself.

And I think if you are able to accept this then that's amazing, but like many situations we face in life, not everyone can accept it.

I've nursed many patients as they die - some have left a huge mark on me in the way that they faced their deaths with acceptance and peace. Others raged and fought against it until they died and never accepted it. I really don't know how you achieve the former rather than the latter.

I have a serious chronic health condition - much of my drs time is spent urging me to accept it. He believes, much as you've said, that my life will be much happier if I can stop fighting it and learn to accept it. Except - I just can't. I can't move away from the "what ifs" - there might be that 1 treatment that changes everything. I can really understand how some people can never give up trying to have the longed for baby.

Anyway, sorry to derail.

I think surrogacy is too problematic to be anything but exploitative. It should be banned.

Well, not everyone who wants a child through surrogacy is infertile first of all, but since we're discussing infertility....

I do think society has a problem with how infertility is framed which it would be much healthier if we could address rather than exploiting women and selling children. Women are still somehow seen as 'less than' if they don't have children and when I was suffering through 7 years of infertility, everyone was always pushing me to the next step of 'treatment' or a 'fix'. I eventually gave up when I decided I ethically didn't agree with using donor eggs.

I wish that I had been put in touch with some amazing childless women who could have shown me that there is life beyond the desire for a child. One woman did say to me something along the lines of 'yes, I really longed for a baby in my late 30s and early 40s, I think it was biological, but that intensity of feeling passed and now I am happy'.

Of the women I met when going through my infertility journey, some have remained childless and they are the happiest of all my friends. None of them has a life without children in it, they are the favoured beloved 'Aunts' to many of their friends children. One friend in particular regularly has her nephews and nieces to stay (her lucky sister) and is in the lives of many other children in a meaningful way. I can already see that my DD1 will always want to spend time with her over me and I can see a time when DD1 might confide in her over me. It's a different relationship. Because I have two kids and no family support, I could never make time to be that kind of adult presence in the life of so many children. I'm a tiny bit jealous sometimes, to be honest. It's not the same as being a biological parent but I often wonder if it's actually better. She is very happy - she has way more money, an interesting rewarding career, and lots of lovely holidays. And when she wants children in her life there is a line of children eager to spend time with their fun Auntie (who isn't busy doing all the shitwork to provide clean clothes / food).

I think there is a biological drive to have children, but if women can't I really don't think it's healthy for anyone to have this attitude that they must have a child no matter the costs. It is possible to be in the life of children in a meaningful way even if you don't have them yourself.

BatShite

I think organ donation carries many of the same risks to the donor as surrogacy does to the mother.

Obviously the biggest difference is that there is a baby to consider. I would like to read research though on the effects of surrogacy on the child and as they grow into adulthood.

There's another thread running about a Canadian same sex couple who used a sperm donor to conceive a child and the breakdown of that family unit and ensuing custody battles (it seems very complex and this is just an outline). My point being that there are frequently very difficult decisions and choices to be made wherever children are concerned. Is surrogacy any more difficult or challenging for the children than any other parent/child relationship potentially is?

I would definitely be a surrogate for either of my children needed it. Outside of them? I don't know because that's where I start to question things more, but that would also be the case with organ donation. Without hesitation I would donate to either of my children and then would consider it for a wider circle outside of them but would definitely question it more.

A donated organ doesn't have feeling and rights like a baby born of surrogacy of donation will, so I don't think we can compare the two. Yet again the consequences for the children/adults of the future are overlooked because a more immediate problem i.e. lack of child can be "fixed" by adults being nice to each other, or coming to an approved arrangement.

I think even altruistic surrogacy has its issues to be honest. Noone seems to think about the baby, in these situations. Then theres..if the child is born with disabilities and the surrogate parents back out, if the woman ends up with birth injuries that affect her for life (like me) and so on. Some may see it as a gift, I see it as exploitation still really.

Though as I said, I am conflicted as in the back of my mind, I do think I would consider it if my sister was infertile. But only for her, noone else, regardless of how much they wanted it.

But altruistic organ donation isn't looked down on.

I personally don't think that payment should be allowed for organ donation or surrogacy - we aren't a collection of spare parts for sale and the risk of exploitation is just too high.

But if you choose to do it solely to help someone else, so long as safeguards are in place, then I think that's a wonderful gift to another person.

Hmm, two posts disappeared when I tried to put them.

I was tyring to say, I realise my last post was worded badly. I am not equating human life with an organ. Just that the situations are kind of similar. Though, selling an organ only affects you, where surrogacy affects another lfie too, so surrgacy is worse, IMO really. Yet it is applauded, while selling organs is looked down upon/illegal.

My posts are not showing here?

I see surrogacy as not dissimilar to the likes of..selling a kidney. And as such, it should be treat the same. Its actually worse, as the baby..suffers from being seperated from its actual mother. A kidney would not suffer being seperated from the body.

Ugh, even speaking about it makes me angry really

Though oddly enough, I do also have a thought in the back of my mind that if, say my sister, was infertile I might offer to do it. But thats extremely different to rich people paying poor women to be incubators. Which tends to be how it goes.

Not impressed with this advertisement mind.

Having children is not a right. You are not entitled to biological children, regardless of your personal health situation. Trying to emotionally manipulate the situation and the intentions of others, is unacceptable. I find it incredibly insulting to those who suffer ill health.

This

I'm not comfortable with a demand that posters have to constantly make qualifying statements
We don't have to spam the thread with placating statements of regret, sympathy etc.

I think if you are directly commenting on a personal story you should at least acknowledge how painful that situation is.

I'm not comfortable with a demand that posters have to constantly make qualifying statements.
We don't have to spam the thread with placating statements of regret, sympathy etc. It's just not necessary between assertive adults.

There is an unpleasant implication from some of the posters on this thread that women who object to surrogacy have no personal experience of infertility, assuming that we would put all our moral objections aside if we were faced with a future without biological children.

It's insulting and it's wrong.

Really? Despite expressly saying it repeatedly, despite sharing painful experiences of my own ( which you ignore, where’s your empathy?! ).

You've only just spoken about your situation and expressed sympathy for others in your last couple of posts.

And don't talk to me about my empathy. Repeatedly on here you've made comments about my lack of comprehension, writing in capitals to spell it out clearly for me etc - have you not stopped to think about why that might be?

How about showing some empathy yourself instead of being quite so quick to remark on what you consider to be a lack of comprehension, or ability to communicate.

You’re a serial derailer and wilfully and deliberately misrepresent others

I comment on what others have said. It's just that you seem to think you are the thread police and get to set the parameters on what you think posters are allowed to say. Other people have raised.points and I have commented on them. That's how this works.

That's not coming across in your posts at all.

Really? Despite expressly saying it repeatedly, despite sharing painful experiences of my own ( which you ignore, where’s your empathy?! ).

You just ignore what people say constantly on these boards. You’re a serial derailer and wilfully and deliberately misrepresent others. In future I won’t reply directly to you, it’s a waste of my time.

Please don’t read my objection to surrogacy as a lack of understanding or thought for those that experience horrible pain with infertility, miscarriages or terminations.

That's not coming across in your posts at all.

Yes we do, you’re writing your thoughts here and have only one focus. We have every idea, since you’ve contributed quite a few comments. What a silly thing to say!

What are my views on surrogacy then?