Famous men and surrogacy

And just for the context of this discussion, I'm infertile and went through multiple miscarriages. No one has the right to be handed a newborn baby.

Surrogacy is purposefully creating an orphan, as opposed to rescuing one.

Given how much we know about attachment disorders now (and how much we don't), surely no ethical society should allow this.

I felt very uncomfortable at that photo, but I think I would have felt the same if it hadn’t been 2 men.
I object to anyone renting a woman’s womb and buying a baby, whoever they are, however it does tend to be more wealthy people using a poorer surrogate.

Having a baby isn't a privilege not a right. surrogacy isn't the answer for gay men to become parents, it's only the answer for rich gay men so it's not exactly a universal solution.

That picture disturbed me, the triumphant arms raised, the baby is a trophy, a possession.

I still cannot understand how in a country where slavery is not allowed after past scandals selling babies it is still possible, celebrated even to buy and sell a human being

I dont know bow I feel about this really.

Obviously I think that gay and lesbian couples make good bad and mediocre parents just like everyone else. If a baby has a happy loving family that's all that matters and you dont have to be straight or married to provide that.

But using women like this doesnt sit right.

I guess I just remember an episode of Chicago med where there was a contract that protected everyone except the mother and the baby. The mother was willing to risk her own life to carry the baby to term or she wouldnt get paid.

This kind if situation is dangerous. What happens of the baby is premature and/or born disabled/brain damaged?. Do the adoptive parents get to just walk away? What happens to the baby that no one wants?

I think.adoptuok or fostering would he better. The baby/child is already here and needs a loving home.

Its gotta be better to do that than rent a womb? It's not exactly going to privileged women agreeing to this is it? It will be poor women desperate to feed their own families.

The question of truly altruistic surrogacy is a good one - I don't think we hear much about the things that can go wrong with egg donors or surrogate mothers who have difficult or risky pregnancies. How could a friendship survive secondary infertility or a birth injury so bad it caused daily pain?

One mother in America died recently and the twins she was carrying for a Spanish couple died too. This was a case of commercial surrogacy and the fact that her husband (and her three sons she left behind) cannot afford her funeral is very telling of their personal financial circumstance that probably brought them to surrogacy in the first place.

I'm thinking about the mother looking at that picture. I hope she is ok.

(The surrogacy consultation from the Law Commission closes on the 11th Oct. )

Plenty of women who give birth don't do this, they don't want to and it's a valid choice for them

same ridiculous argument as when people say a trans-man isn't a woman because they cant bear a child and someone pipes up "so women who've had hysterectomies arent women"....seriously?!!!

Yes there are women that cant do skin to skin, who cant breastfeed- that is not the same as a man choosing to take this option away from the baby for his own selfish benefit.

Oh, I grew up in a rough council estate where there wasn't a lot of '4th trimester' going on, not trauma or neglect, either, but not a lot of attachment parenting, either.

Very little, or at a minimum.

The only mother I know who didn't talk to her child was very neglectful because of trauma. Also no ideal.

Some women don't talk to their children?

Very little, or at a minimum. Some get sick after birth and cannot be there in the beginning.

And this child is with one its biological parents, one of the men will be her biological father.

Some women don't talk to their children? I'd argue that's an issue.

No skin to skin with mum, no mums voice, no BFing, no fourth trimester.

Plenty of women who give birth don't do this, they don't want to and it's a valid choice for them.

Sorry this is the image

I saw these pictures on MN and thought of FWR.

I don't know their official statement, but in the article I saw there was absolutely no mention of the woman who risked her and her health to bring this baby into the world.

I don't know why they chose this image either, they aren't even cuddling her or anything, just wheeling her away from the woman who gave birth to her like a prize they have won at a fair or something.

It does seem like the need to be woke about gay men and surrogacy absolutely trumps the very obvious issues with it though.

Adoption is completely different because the baby is already here. And everyone is just trying to do the best for them. And adoption is not without struggles, attachment being primary among them.

Creating a child to be sold with sub-optimal conditions built into the process seems horrible. No skin to skin with mum, no mums voice, no BFing, no fourth trimester.

It's not about gay parents. With one glaring exception all the gay parents I know are great. It's about renting the inside of women's bodies, selling babies, creating babies to fill some need of the parent rather than the child knowing it isn't ideal... homophobia is a useful 'shut up the critics' technique. Luckily no one gives a crap about misogyny.

In a perfect world gay men would find it easy to adopt unfortunately many adoption agencies refuse to work with gay male couples because they are homophobes who literally believe gay men adopt children in order to rape them. So I do feel for the gay men here.

But, the solution can’t be to use women’s bodies like incubators. I’m sorry it can’t.

If you are a gay man and want biological kids an ethical option is a blended family. Befriend a single woman who wants kids but not a straight male companion and be the sperm donor. Three parents are better than two.

And with feminists support continue to work to convince more adoption agencies that gay male make great parents. The evidence is good that gay parents are not worse than straight ones in terms of children’s outcomes. Keep pushing that angle.

Stop using women.

Gay men and lesbians are not really equivalents in this scenario.

A baby only knows the person it grows inside, I dont think being ripped away the moment they are born, whether passed to a sister, a gay couple or anyone else is what is best for that child.

As for the question should gay men be allowed to adopt? Are they adopting a teenager...oh no wait they want a baby- obliviously!!!!!

Having a child is a privilege not a right- adoption as with raising kids full stop, it should be whats best for the child.
Should black kids be adopted by white parents? The lefties of the world will throw out the line "as long as the child is loved"......but its far more complex than that. A child who is up for adoption has already been denied its birth family (for whatever reason), I think they in turn deserve the best family for their situation and to make life as easy for them as possible- weighed up with being stuck in Foster Care

Well, one of the men is the child's biological father.

So are you against a sister carrying her sisters baby for her out of love? No money changing hands?

On MN, yes! People who are infertile should just buck up because having children is not a right (unless you're completely feckless procreating with a feckless git on your 3rd+ kid no way to support another child but lucky enough to be fertile).

How is that baby any worse off than a baby who was conceived when they weren’t wanted and has a shit life by useless parents?

Clearly we don't want to set the bar that low. We can't control bad parenting but we can legislate against babies being bought and sold like this.

Not that I think for a moment in this selfish consumer society we live in now that we will. If the men want to buy themselves a baby then that will be enabled.

It is a cruel twist of Mother Nature that gay women can relatively easily have babies, whereas gay men are stuck....
However, Mother Nature is not always kind-think of people who aren’t blessed with good health or other attributes.
It all hinges on whether you think a man has the right to buy a baby, which really many people would find abhorrent.

The picture really fucking annoyed me. A baby being removed from her mother at birth by men. What other institution in Ireland used to do that to sell the babys?

I saw it in Facebook & all the comments were gushing bar 1 that said where’s the mammy & another congrats you bought a baby. Followed by comments of hateful bigot

So are you against a sister carrying her sisters baby for her out of love? No money changing hands? How is that baby any worse off than a baby who was conceived when they weren’t wanted and has a shit life by useless parents?

Are you saying gay men shouldn’t adopt either?