MN editorial on how wonderful surrogacy is

Dr spouse, that's my point, we can't "make adoption easier" because adopting a child isn't an easy thing to do.

I didn't say it should be easier.
If you can't cope with the current assessment for adoption you shouldn't be raising someone else's birth child.

But you are creating a very much loved and wanted child hopefully born into a living and caring family.

Why isn't that better than a child possibly conceived deliberately into an unloving or possibly harmful environment, or simply not wanted?

Well why are you comparing? Just because there’s another bad situation doesn’t make surrogacy a good option. Neither is good. Babies aren’t objects. They have rights too. This is about intentionally creating it, using the body of the mother who is then separated from them at birth. Why the fuck would anyone want this situation?

I don't think it's a case of anyone making adoption hard, it is hard, it will bring different challenges to raising a child you gave birth to. If we try to make the adoption process easier there will just be more failed adoptions.

Life long infertility in a country that fetishes parenthood and makes adoption exceptionally hard is also complicated and problematic.
If you are not suitable to be an adoptive parent you aren't suitable to parent a child born through surrogacy either. So if the process is too hard for you, you shouldn't be adopting any child.

I'm with JessicaWakefield, it's not right to deliberately create a baby that has to be taken from their mother.

@DonorConceivedMe have you considered doing an AMA?

There's not much evidence for the long term effects on the surrogate and donor sperm/egg children, especially as adults. We know from adoption and fostering that being separated from or not knowing birth parents can cause profound issues for some. It's one of those situations where we are so focused on the new parents and their needs, we don't give sufficient thought to the consequences for the child. I can't agree with it. And that's a factor for all sorts of surrogacy and donation from ethical issues of buying poor women's bodies etc.

I agree there's no guarantee for the parents to be loving and caring. I know a family where the father sexually abused the adopted daughter.

I'm against commercial surrogacy. The potential for exploitation is just too big. More on the fence about altruistic surrogacy, but it needs to be heavily regulated.

What if they're not loving and caring? What if they're like that adoptive dad in Cardiff who murdered the little girl he adopted?

We don't allow children or adults to be bought and sold so why is it acceptable because they're babies?

But you are creating a very much loved and wanted child hopefully born into a living and caring family.

Why isn't that better than a child possibly conceived deliberately into an unloving or possibly harmful environment, or simply not wanted?

Has anyone studied the effects on the child of being born to a surrogate? What are the long term effects on the children? Is it known to be detrimental to them?

I am against the idea of commercial surrogacy but I don't see altruistic, heavily regulated surrogacy as any worse than babies being adopted at birth because their parents didn't want the child but opted not to have an abortion.

Well it is because surrogacy is planned. You are intentionally creating the situation which is not in the best interests of a child.

My question was purely in regards to the point about the 4th trimester - if that is so important how do babies removed from their mother at birth for adoption manage?

Adoption isn’t planned like surrogacy. It’s making the best of an unplanned or difficult situation.

It's traumatic to be adopted for a wide variety of reasons but attachment happens as a result of good, consistent care in the first few months of life.

And hopefully this also happens with a much wanted child carried by a surrogate? I am against the idea of commercial surrogacy but I don't see altruistic, heavily regulated surrogacy as any worse than babies being adopted at birth because their parents didn't want the child but opted not to have an abortion.

Adoption in the UK is a last resort option involving social workers and the courts. If a baby is removed for adoption at birth it is because the mother is either a danger to the child or incapable of looking after it. The child is removed because that is in the best interests of the child- the wants of adoptive parents don't come into it.

Babies can be surrendered at birth by the parents though can't they? It's not always a best interest removal of the child. Sometimes it's the result of an unwanted pregnancy.

My question was purely in regards to the point about the 4th trimester - if that is so important how do babies removed from their mother at birth for adoption manage?

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

Life long infertility in a country that fetishes parenthood and makes adoption exceptionally hard is also complicated and problematic.

Having a child isn’t a right.

@LassOfFyvie no my friend was in the US as I explained up thread.

@anothernotherone of course I can see it’s complicated and potentially problematic. I see that, I just don’t agree with making it illegal. Life long infertility in a country that fetishes parenthood and makes adoption exceptionally hard is also complicated and problematic. Having seen at close hand a surrogacy that worked well for all involved I wouldn’t ban it outright. I do think it needs heavy regulation and protections built in for both sides.

Some on this thread are saying that adoption in this country is less complicated than surrogacy because it’s rarely newborns. You do know that’s because we have high rates of abortion compared to countries with high rates of newborn adoption? I wholeheartedly support the right to choose but I am surprised some on this thread suggest adoption is less problematic than surrogacy because it’s rarely newborns. The logical conclusion of that argument is that you are saying it’s cruel to deny a baby a fourth trimester and better to keep newborn adoption rates low through abortion. I’m not sure I agree with that logic.

Even babies adopted as newborns by loving parents have been found to have attachment issues
While as an adoptive parent, I completely agree with all of what people have said about the non-equivalence of surrogacy and adoption, this isn't actually true.
It's traumatic to be adopted for a wide variety of reasons but attachment happens as a result of good, consistent care in the first few months of life.

"Are MN picking sides"

Yes, I think they are. They are choosing to adhere to their policy of being supportive to all parents. And that applies however the DC arrived.

Do you think that adoption should be banned to then? I can't see the difference between adoption and surrogacy as regards the 4th trimester

It's not remotely the same. Adoption in the UK is a last resort option involving social workers and the courts. If a baby is removed for adoption at birth it is because the mother is either a danger to the child or incapable of looking after it. The child is removed because that is in the best interests of the child- the wants of adoptive parents don't come into it.

the UK does not allow commercial surrogacy

Good point Lass.

It's literally buying the body of a woman who needs money.

Yes it is! It’s pretty grim all round.