Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

FFS re. Hilaria & Alec Baldwin and normalisation of surrogacy

238 replies

PatienceVirtue · 03/03/2021 14:15

www.etonline.com/hilaria-and-alec-baldwins-daughter-lucia-was-born-via-surrogate-161509

The Baldwins, a baby-hungry 'Spaniard' and rich Hollywood male, have had a sixth (sixth!) child six months after having their fifth. Apparently by surrogacy, well it wasn't carried by her obviously. Which means they implanted an embryo or embryos into some poor womb-holder while she was already heavily pregnant with their fifth child.

Why? FFS. I just don't understand it. Originally surrogacy was sold as solution to the utter misery of infertility and I feel a great deal of sympathy with this. But when it becomes the go-to of extremely wealthy families who already have numerous children (cf Kim Kardashian, Robbie Williams et al), then its exploitative and transactional nature is exposed.

I can't bear the way it's become so normalised to use women like ovens. Stop call it carrying a baby, like they're handbags. It's growing a baby from a microscopic dot to a newborn.

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
OhHolyJesus · 02/04/2021 17:45

Yes exactly, and based on what we know about rape, it's pretty much decriminalised.

When the judiciary/ministry of justice shows such disregard for women it's unsurprising when as a sex class we either don't exist or when we do exist it's for a function or a purpose.

In related news, I hear the next season of Handmaids Tale is out in the 19th on Hulu...

SchadenfreudePersonified · 02/04/2021 17:41

Exactly! It's just wrong. These are babies. Little helpless lives.

I get so annoyed when people say "But it will happen anyway so why not legalise it?"

Rape happens anyway.

Murder happens anyway.

Child abuse happens anyway.

Should we just legalise all of these, too?

OhHolyJesus · 02/04/2021 17:30

You're right on all points Schaden

See the links here for Brigette who was rejected by commissioning parents

stopsurrogacynowuk.org/documentaries/

For the other story you mentioned look up David and Wendy Farnell 60 mins or Baby Gammy.

...and as for women cheating commissioning couples, that happens too.

www.falmouthpacket.co.uk/news/11281337.devon-womans-surrogate-pregnancy-scam-cheated-cornish-victims/

So tighter regulations are needed, not fewer, and even then what does that sanction?

SchadenfreudePersonified · 02/04/2021 17:03

Thank you Holy. I didn't know the full legalities.

TBH I thought that Faye's husband had his head well screwed on - I can understand that he might not be left with another man's child to raise (especially as it seems that they had decided that two children were right for their own family).

I also wonder how things would play out if the commissioning parents decided for whatever reason that they didn't want the baby (eg, wife becomes pregnant after all: baby is born with a defect - horrible word, but you know what I mean - one partner dies and other can't bear the thought of bringing up the baby themselves - particularly, perhaps, if they had no genetic input).

I'm sure I can remember an instance some years ago when a couple (I think they were American) refused to take their baby because s/he was Down's syndromes, and the mother, already very poor (Korean or Thai, I think) was left with an extra mouth to feed. (I only mention nationalities because it goes towards the power imbalances involved - white wealthy privilege vs poor women of colour).

To me it is "selling children" and I also think that many, if not most, of these women have no idea of the emotional heartbreak they are setting themselves up for.

There was a programme some time ago about surrogacy in the US where the imbalance worked the other way - a couple paid a huge sum to a woman to carry a baby for them - in addition to which she was demanding extra stuff right, left and centre - and then she declined to give them the baby. I'm pretty sure she also claimed child maintenance, too. This is apparently not uncommon.

OhHolyJesus · 02/04/2021 16:41

the birth mother is, as far as I am aware, the legal mother of the child.

This is true but adoption is not needed if one of the commissioning parents is also the genetic parent then the process is a parental order and adoption (with all that entails) is not required.

In the case of David, the single gay man, (and wasn't he cross that he needed a woman or two) it was his sperm and the egg of another woman, that made Baby Miles so Faye, the birth mother and legal mother, signs her parental responsibly and legal parental rights over with a parental order and David can avoid the adoption process.

Much of made of this with the Faye's husband. It was framed as a 'bad thing' as he didn't want parental responsibility, but it is set up this way so men cannot 'pimp' our their wives for baby-making without some of the legal responsibility.

SchadenfreudePersonified · 02/04/2021 15:46

[quote littlebillie]I think this was awful last year

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/coronavirus-dozens-of-babies-stranded-without-parents-due-to-border-closures-11988587[/quote]
That is heartbreaking.

SchadenfreudePersonified · 02/04/2021 15:35

@WeRoarSometimes

This really is terrible. I had a thread earlier this week about the BBC3 coverage: The Surrrogates starting and a 23 year old single mother being a surrogate mother for a male couple.

She had already disclosed feeling very low, feeling that life was not worth continuing before meeting the chaps via an app which links people up for surrogacy.

Just hearing that should be enough to understand that the women taking on this role are by their very nature vulnerable, whether through their relationships (single mum V couple), socio-economic background, and self-esteem.
The power imbalance is huge. And power imbalances almost always lead to that power being abused.

I've watched the first two episodes of this

It isn't comfortable viewing. I felt that there was a huge power imbalance in at least two of the three instances I saw, and even the third one was disquieting ("As a gay man I don't have access to a womb."). Someone on another thread has suggested that he is autistic, and that may be so, but in NO instance did I get the impression that the child was the focus of attention - always the adoptive parents (I assume they so have to adopt the baby, because even if using eggs/sperm from a couple, the birth mother is, as far as I am aware, the legal mother of the child.

SchadenfreudePersonified · 02/04/2021 15:30

@WeRoarSometimes

In a way I find it more worrying when a couple without fertility issues (they've had 5 babies) chooses to find a surrogate mother to nourish and grow a child for them. I guess it is because they can pay and they probably didn't consider there was an issues of ethics.
I will believe that surrogacy is ethical and altruistic the day I see a rich woman carrying a baby for a poor one.
MinnieMous3 · 01/04/2021 22:51

She’s had her baby daughter’s ears pierced, you can see it in her most recent insta photo Sad Obviously not her son’s though. I remember crying when my newborn had to have the heel prick test (hormonal), I can’t imagine willingly piercing her ears Sad the babies just seem to be fancy dolls to be styled for photos.

Delphinium20 · 14/03/2021 22:51

The same applies to donating your egg which is less like having a haircut for a wig to be made for cancer patients but more like giving away your DNA and future children.

Well said.

WeRoarSometimes · 14/03/2021 21:46

The arguments about this being women's choice, live and let live approach is that it doesn't safeguard the vulnerable.

People lobbying for relaxation of laws and introduction of a much more commercial approach have considerable vested interest in surrogacy laws favouring the would-be parents over the surrogate mother.

It got me thinking about countries where surrogacy is banned
completely, Sweden and Germany for example.
Both countries have banned surrogacy. It can't be because these nations are not progressive. They are known for having good health and social safety systems for their societies though.

WeRoarSometimes · 14/03/2021 21:35

This really is terrible.
I had a thread earlier this week about the BBC3 coverage: The Surrrogates starting and a 23 year old single mother being a surrogate mother for a male couple.

She had already disclosed feeling very low, feeling that life was not worth continuing before meeting the chaps via an app which links people up for surrogacy.

Just hearing that should be enough to understand that the women taking on this role are by their very nature vulnerable, whether through their relationships (single mum V couple), socio-economic background, and self-esteem.
The power imbalance is huge. And power imbalances almost always lead to that power being abused.

OhHolyJesus · 14/03/2021 19:59

Yet again indeed. It never stops. I'm not surprised that young woman like this one

www.thesun.co.uk/tv/14248799/surrogate-baby-lockdown/

Is...
Finding her value in her ability to have babies
Thinks she will find the lifelong friendship she clearly hopes for if she gives these men a baby
Says she isn't doing it for the money but she is a single mother (it doesn't say if she is employed or not)
Choosing to ignore her mum's warning and she thinks she will have a relationship with the baby girl

The same applies to donating your egg which is less like having a haircut for a wig to be made for cancer patients but more like giving away your DNA and future children.

The libfem/be kind/her body her choice approach will not end well for women who cannot stop it from leaking into their lives, thought process and decision making.

Number3BigCupOfTea · 14/03/2021 19:52

Wow. Be kind = do what suits men. YET AGAIN

WeRoarSometimes · 14/03/2021 19:31

@OhHolyJesus
Your last post..
With bells on.

Delphinium20 · 14/03/2021 19:31

[quote OhHolyJesus]It seems fitting at this point to share this blog on 'random acts of kindness' from TwoDads.

This is not intended as a derail OP, I hope you don't mind the juxtaposition on the earlier point on how same sex male couples really shouldn't be denied the 'right' to biological children and how women really should 'be kind'.

www.twodadsuk.com/blog/egg-donation-a-life-changing-act-of-kindness/[/quote]
This makes me see red. There is limited if any study into the long-term health of egg donors and how this impacts their fertility. Those two men are manipulating young women- women who have never had children of their own - into giving away their eggs. And they equate it an "act of kindness."

Why is it that the concerns of older, experienced women (many of us mothers) are so overlooked in this conversation of the ethics of surrogacy and egg donation. Nobody understands this as much as we do, yet somehow when we raise our voices we are seen as "dream deflators," or hypocrites. We know firsthand the bonds between mother and baby, the lack of medical research of our bodies and we see the long-term impacts of life choices. This just reinforces to me that misogyny is particularly dismissive of older, wiser women. We threaten mens ability to do whatever they want because we know the pitfalls of being kind.

OhHolyJesus · 14/03/2021 19:15

It seems fitting at this point to share this blog on 'random acts of kindness' from TwoDads.

This is not intended as a derail OP, I hope you don't mind the juxtaposition on the earlier point on how same sex male couples really shouldn't be denied the 'right' to biological children and how women really should 'be kind'.

www.twodadsuk.com/blog/egg-donation-a-life-changing-act-of-kindness/

Delphinium20 · 14/03/2021 18:58

Yes it’s to save a life, but the same principles can be applied, in the sense that it’s a medical intervention involving someone else having to give up a part of their own body

I think surrogacy is the one intervention using another person's body parts that does NOT save a life. This is why surrogacy is so abhorrent...you aren't saving anyone's life. If you consider it a medical intervention you suggest surrogacy is a cure for infertility...that is Handmaid's Tale...

The last thing I will say is that if you have children, then it’s very hypocritical to decided morally that surrogacy is immoral. You’ve no idea how that couple feel so it’s it’s a kick in the teeth throwing stones at them from your ivory tower

Again. No one has a right to a child. No one has a right to a woman's body because you are in emotional pain. Having gone through pregnancy and birth, I can assure you I would NEVER ask someone to do that for me...I could never live with knowing I pushed someone to risk their life for me to have a baby...and then took my child away from the birth mother. When I worried if I would be able to have children, surrogacy was NEVER on the table. I knew adoption, fostering or simply being an involved aunt were the only acceptable options if fertility failed me.

If some couples feel it's appropriate to ask such a thing of a woman and to do that to their child tells me they have no claim to any moral high ground at all. It's desperation and a willingness to overlook ethics to get a specific desired outcome. Children are not a prize nor an acquisition. I think people pushing surrogacy are trying to change break the moral code to accept using women and children as commodities.

TableFlowerss · 14/03/2021 16:27

@OhHolyJesus

If anything, I feel the laws will be more relaxed in future, because the argument for same sex couples (men) to pursue discrimination claims, against laws that take away their rights to become patents, will be high.

So it's all about the men for you, that makes sense as it fits in with your libfem approach to 'feminism'.

There are no laws that prevent men in same sex couples from becoming parents. Biology prevents them. They can and do become adoptive parents and they can co-parent if they do chose. But you seem to think that women have a role to play to ensure that gay men can be biological parents and that is not only a right but also a duty of women to provide womb rental and babies. You may have overlook the post from SapatSea who reference the gay couple in Scotland who got their surrogacy arrangement paid for by the NHS. There is no discrimination but you do need a woman, or several, to make, grow and birth a baby. In that we can agree.

That’s just batshit though isn’t it. I must say, it strikes me particularly with your posts, there is a complete illogical stretch from one topic that goes completely off topic and tries to tie it with something else entirely.

Of course it's batshit, I was being sarcastic. I was using your own argument to to examine the flaws in your statements.

You say that so-called 'altruistic' surrogacy in families is not anyone else's business. You made no comment based on the example I shared where a friend did it for another friend. I noted that was conveniently ignored. Is that because it's different in families?

So what, by your definition, is permitted to be 'our business'? What else would you have us not discuss?

Safeguarding children and vulnerable adults is everyone's business. This is embedded in law and extends to all local council policy. You should check your own. I make surrogacy in general my business because I clearly have a strong interest. You are free to campaign on what you feel in important.

The problems within other countries as you’ve just spouted off, have nothing to do with whether surrogacy is legal here or not or whether it should be.

We look at other countries to examine our own laws and develop and change them.

The Law Commission met with officials from the Ukraine in their work prior to releasing the public consultation. You might have noted that Ukraine is the bargain basement international surrogacy hub, to rival states in America due to their low cost services and relaxed laws. You might have seen the Kiev Hotel Babies in the news last summer but due to your personal view of attachment theory, you might not mind if newborns don't have a primary carer, whether they be 'professional babysitters' in hotel nurseries or 'baby dens'. You might want to compare the public consultations on surrogacy for Australia and New Zealand to see how similar or different they are.

You could also see the locations of exhibitors Men Having Babies to see where they have been and how effective they have been in Israel.

To be clear I'm not suggesting that there is a global conspiracy to create a baby-selling access but if you think that they are completely unconnected and that at no time does the U.K. law-makers look at other country systems then I think you are naive.

I wrote a long reply but my phone froze so I haven’t got the time or inclination to reply anymore. I have better things to do with my tone like spend it with my children. Given its 6 against 1 I can’t waste anymore of my time banging my head against a brick.

The last thing I will say is that if you have children, then it’s very hypocritical to decided morally that surrogacy is immoral. You’ve no idea how that couple feel so it’s it’s a kick in the teeth throwing stones at them from your ivory tower.

If you couldn’t have children then the arguments could had that because you can’t, no one else should be able to.

All this in the name of ‘protecting’ the rights of some women, whilst chucking stones at the other ones... sigh

I’m going to bow out now but I’m pleased that you lot don’t get to decide the moral code for everyone and please don’t proclaim to be doing it for the benefit of all women, because some childless women really won’t agree with you....!

TableFlowerss · 14/03/2021 16:03

@FannyCann

the argument for same sex couples (men) to pursue discrimination claims, against laws that take away their rights to become patents, will be high

So women who deny men the use of their uterus are guilty of discrimination? Men have a right to demand women provide them with eggs and gestational services?
Wow. Welcome to Gilead Aunt Lydia.

But your wrong - your gong on about it like a woman is picked out at random and told she will carry a baby for someone, with no choice etc...

You seem to be missing the part where she wants to do it to help her friends.

You’re all for women ‘rights’, yet at the same time, you want to take away their choice to decide what to do with their bodies. So you support the rights of SOME women, but not others..... makes sense... not

OhHolyJesus · 14/03/2021 15:18

If anything, I feel the laws will be more relaxed in future, because the argument for same sex couples (men) to pursue discrimination claims, against laws that take away their rights to become patents, will be high.

So it's all about the men for you, that makes sense as it fits in with your libfem approach to 'feminism'.

There are no laws that prevent men in same sex couples from becoming parents. Biology prevents them. They can and do become adoptive parents and they can co-parent if they do chose. But you seem to think that women have a role to play to ensure that gay men can be biological parents and that is not only a right but also a duty of women to provide womb rental and babies. You may have overlook the post from SapatSea who reference the gay couple in Scotland who got their surrogacy arrangement paid for by the NHS. There is no discrimination but you do need a woman, or several, to make, grow and birth a baby. In that we can agree.

That’s just batshit though isn’t it. I must say, it strikes me particularly with your posts, there is a complete illogical stretch from one topic that goes completely off topic and tries to tie it with something else entirely.

Of course it's batshit, I was being sarcastic. I was using your own argument to to examine the flaws in your statements.

You say that so-called 'altruistic' surrogacy in families is not anyone else's business. You made no comment based on the example I shared where a friend did it for another friend. I noted that was conveniently ignored. Is that because it's different in families?

So what, by your definition, is permitted to be 'our business'? What else would you have us not discuss?

Safeguarding children and vulnerable adults is everyone's business. This is embedded in law and extends to all local council policy. You should check your own. I make surrogacy in general my business because I clearly have a strong interest. You are free to campaign on what you feel in important.

The problems within other countries as you’ve just spouted off, have nothing to do with whether surrogacy is legal here or not or whether it should be.

We look at other countries to examine our own laws and develop and change them.

The Law Commission met with officials from the Ukraine in their work prior to releasing the public consultation. You might have noted that Ukraine is the bargain basement international surrogacy hub, to rival states in America due to their low cost services and relaxed laws. You might have seen the Kiev Hotel Babies in the news last summer but due to your personal view of attachment theory, you might not mind if newborns don't have a primary carer, whether they be 'professional babysitters' in hotel nurseries or 'baby dens'. You might want to compare the public consultations on surrogacy for Australia and New Zealand to see how similar or different they are.

You could also see the locations of exhibitors Men Having Babies to see where they have been and how effective they have been in Israel.

To be clear I'm not suggesting that there is a global conspiracy to create a baby-selling access but if you think that they are completely unconnected and that at no time does the U.K. law-makers look at other country systems then I think you are naive.

FannyCann · 14/03/2021 15:12

the argument for same sex couples (men) to pursue discrimination claims, against laws that take away their rights to become patents, will be high

So women who deny men the use of their uterus are guilty of discrimination? Men have a right to demand women provide them with eggs and gestational services?
Wow. Welcome to Gilead Aunt Lydia.

TableFlowerss · 14/03/2021 14:54

@OhHolyJesus

The "nothing to do with us" mantra has to be one of the most illogical ever made

And with that argument we can happily ignore:

The murders of gay men in Iran
The murders of lesbians in Chile
The murders of baby girls in China
The rape of girls by 'elders' of the village in Sudan
The kidnapping of girls in Nigeria

...Amongst other things and not campaign for laws to change like Repeal the 8th, same-sex marriage or human rights like freedom of speech and freedom of expression.

It's nothing to do with us, women step down. Back to the kitchen sink with you.

That’s just batshit though isn’t it. I must say, it strikes me particularly with your posts, there is a complete illogical stretch from one topic that goes completely off topic and tries to tie it with something else entirely.

Everything is to do with everyone in that case then, but that’s not how laws work or indeed, the world. The problems within other countries as you’ve just spouted off, have nothing to do with whether surrogacy is legal here or not or whether it should be.

By all means, use emotive examples but it doesn’t validate your point of wanting a blanket ban on surrogacy.

If anything, I feel the laws will be more relaxed in future, because the argument for same sex couples (men) to pursue discrimination claims, against laws that take away their rights to become patents, will be high.

MimiDaisy11 · 14/03/2021 13:14

The "nothing to do with us" mantra has to be one of the most illogical ever made

It often goes along with the argument that no one is holding a gun to the woman's head an forcing them so there's no issue. As if context and wider issues play no part.

Swipe left for the next trending thread