In GENERAL terms, all forms of surrogacy, altruistic included, is problematic

I agree. Same applies to prostitution/sex work.
I'm seeing a lot of parallels to the sex work "debate". The focus on the woman and her choice to be a surrogate rather than on the people who exploit her body for their needs, and the ethics of those people. I've seen gay couples in the public eye announce "their" pregnancy and birth with no acknowledgement of the mother. They just were entitled to use the mother in exchange for cash to "buy" another human (the baby). What kind of morals do people like that have? Are they going to raise "their" baby with similar attitudes to women and to relationships?

The other parallel I see with sex work is the constant desire to push the conversation onto "altruistic" surrogacy. This is comparable to focusing on the high-end prostitute who does it to pay her way through uni. Many many surrogates are coerced into it or exploited because they are poor. I think true altruistic surrogacy is probably in the minority and yet that's all that's discussed.

I think if most people engaged their brains beyond "she chose to help a childless couple, how kind" they would be horrified. But similar to sex work, most people just pay attention to what is in the media and probably don't want to think about it more.

The whole thing turns

So does searching for a surrogate via social media circumvent this law?

Yes interesting - it is stated in the surrogacy Pathway that advertising that you are looking for a surrogate is is criminal offence as is advertising that you are willing to be a surrogate. And a third party cannot act on your behalf except for not for profit organisations.

This particular article shines a rather risky light on this particular situation.

To be clear with my first line, the NHS do wholly support pregnant women irrespective of how or why they conceived. So any statements that might generally state,as an example, the NHS doesn't wont my journey because I'm not heterosexual, would be unfair and incorrect.

I think it is also interesting to begin to understand how few women can deliver a baby without medical intervention these days. It does throw a different light on the surrogacy discussion.

For instance, I had no idea in my pregnancy that I was going to end up high risk. I think having been through that experience does mean I don’t have a grasp that a woman can go through pregnancy with no issues at all and then deliver a baby that they have not bonded with at all.

Obviously, it is possible and obviously in 20, 30 years time, it is also possible that the risks of the situation may seem different or not.

It is certainly never as straightforward as people like to make it seem though.

Absolutely, it's very valuable to hear a range of perspectives.
Thank you to the women who share their points of view.

I wanted to say that I appreciated the input from the surrogates on the thread. I haven’t changed my views, but I do like to hear what people who disagree with me think.

You have misunderstood the quote. This is an argument employed by pro-surrogacy advocates who frame the desire for a child in human rights language and childlessness as a violation of this (assumed) human right, which must be rectified and which frames any resistance to surrogacy as breaching the (assumed) human right to be a parent of those seeking to acquire a baby through surrogacy

The quote is from an essay I linked to upthread that explains in detail why both commercial and altruistic surrogacy violate the human rights of the women and children involved. I can only recommend you read it. If only to see what the other side is arguing

Thanks for this from upthread, charlieparley. I was tired yesterday and couldn’t find the energy to re-explain myself as Plan had got my point back to front, but you’ve captured it better than I could have.

Do straight couples planning to use a surrogate have to pay for their own STD tests etc? I’d be surprised if they didn’t? Presumably it would happen through a private IVF clinic so the private clinic would require the tests be done.

Thank you MN for standing up to keep this thread. Every time I read a surrogacy thread I learn a great deal.

Even when I read about the interpretations of the thread on other SM platforms.

where if the sex was actually wanted, the woman in question would do it for free, for her own pleasure. Such a great point and very much translates to commercial surrogacy.

Why would I want to keep someone else's baby?? If I wanted another baby I would have had one with my husband!

Sorry to seem like I'm picking on you (not my intention) but your answers were so rich in meaning that I'd like to deconstruct this phrase a bit.

To start, I think this phrase illustrates the distinction between abortion (ending a pregnancy because the woman doesn't want to go through it & have a baby) and surrogacy (deliberately entering an agreement to undergo a pregnancy with all of the risks, for a baby the woman doesn't actually want).

It also highlights the transactional nature of surrogacy - if the mother actually wanted to have a baby, she'd do the whole process for herself. She'd be the one in control. But some sort of external consideration/force is at play here. There is another party asking her to become pregnant and give the baby to them - with incentives of some sort, be they emotional/financial/social/etc. This is why there is an agreement, a transaction, perhaps negotiated to a level of detail that seems incredible. One wonders how that amount of planning/control represents a form of autonomy or freedom for the mother.

Some might say the situation is similar to selling sex, where if the sex was actually wanted, the woman in question would do it for free, for her own pleasure.

It's a last resort chance of having a partially biological child. The IP's have to find a way to justify and pacify what they are partaking in, as do the surrogates. To normalise their feelings and reasonings for doing it.

Accepting that is different for gay male couples where this method is their only route to a biological child if they don't have a female friend to birth and co-parent with (or if they don't want that type of family unit).

Which is why it gets harder to keep the altruistic rose tinted glasses on with this, and for me it's bigger than just surrogacy.

IVF is only 25% successful as it is. The cost, the time, the emotions, the physical toll on the women going back time after time. When you're emotionally invested in your own child I understand, my eggs my body, my success or failure. But it must be so much more challenging when you are creating a child for someone else and continue to fail. The guilt? Their anguish? Resentment? Time wasted with the 'wrong' surrogate? The agencies talk about building friendships with surrogates. But how many actually stay 'friends' when the 'agreement' is complete. How many are still getting invites for lunch?

The success stories are few and far between though I appreciate they exist. It raises questions about siblings of shared dna and how this plays out over time. The post here the other day where the lady found a dna match that can only be a half sibling that nobody knew about. How is this being dealt with by those surrogates who have their own children. Do the kids have a right to contact at any point? So they even have a right to know? When they're 18? How might they feel towards each other?

And No-one is sharing the stories of the women and the IPs where there was no resulting successful pregnancy.

With such a low success rate it's borderline experimental. More so for gestational surrogates - especially , because of the added complexities.

Will we accept a covid vaccine that only works 25% of the time? Not likely. So how has it become ok for creating human life in a Petri dish that doesn't then survive 75% of the time. The clinical availability, doesn't stack up against the results. And the restricted availability in the NHS makes that fairly clear - you need to be really good candidates and still it's only 25%.

But of course, if you have the money, you can buy the service from private hospitals and women as often as you like. The self-centredness of this is astounding.

Firstly - I assume (correct me if I am wrong) that you did not add up the costs of your pregnancy (or separately itemise them on a spreadsheet and keep all your receipts). I did. I can tell you to the penny what mine cost. And it definitely adds up. I have a senior job and primark clothes are just not appropriate for my role. I spent about £1.2k on clothes shoes and underwear for during pregnancy and for after birth, until I fit back into my own clothes. Bras, tights, leggings, shoes (my feet swelled). Pregnancy pillow, birthing ball, parking at the hospital, travel costs. It adds up.

Meanwhile, back in the real world...

I really wish I had had over a grand to spunk on pregnancy clothes though!

Anon992, think you took significant risks (for yourself, and also your partner and your DC) for your friends, and perhaps also payment. It’s good that it worked out OK, in your case.

The biggest expenses that surrogates incur are often loss of earnings. That was certainly the case for us. My partner took 2 weeks of unpaid leave (not entitled to paternity leave for obvious reasons) to look after me and our existing children immediately after birth. That was £3k straight off.

Does the agreement allow for further expense should partners be required to take a longer period off work in the event of a traumatic delivery requiring prolonged recovery? I remember a woman whose symphysis pubis split during a difficult forceps delivery. Six weeks later she still couldn't walk upstairs and went up and down on her bottom like a small child. She was so grateful her husband was a teacher and it was the summer holidays. How could a woman possibly get back to the business of caring for her small children a couple of weeks after this sort of event? But commissioning parents who have agreed a price may be somewhat put out by requests for more money to cover additional expenses.

I

I don’t know if it still exists but there used to be. £500 maternity grant available to those who needed it. What do those who think that being pregnant costs £15, 000 imagine that those on benefits at the time do? I have never had a spare £15, 000 to spend on being pregnant!

@MinecraftMother can I ask Were you a host surrogate or traditional surrogate on each occasion ?

What if everything is arranged beforehand and one of the intended parents dies unexpectedly? Or both do? Or they divorce? Or get cold feet? Or lose their job? Or decide that actually, although they decided before they’d pay for costs they now feel like the surrogate is taking the piss and want to renege on the deal?

Like spending £1,200 on maternity clothes, for instance?

And then another, what, £14k on a pregnancy pillow, toiletries and vitamins?

The baby wants its mummy. The one it was growing inside. The one who it could hear talk and sing. The one it could smell and breath. Babies want their mummy. And her mummy smell and her mummy hormones and her milk if she is able.
It’s basic need and love.