Page 2 | FFS re. Hilaria & Alec Baldwin and normalisation of surrogacy

PatienceVirtue · 2021-03-03T14:15:53+00:00

[[https://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.

OhHolyJesus · 14/03/2021 12:59

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.

FannyCann · 14/03/2021 12:34

It's relentless isn't it SapatSea

To top it all there is a new series on BBC3
"The Surrogates - The kindness of strangers".

I haven't had a chance to watch it yet - I'm clean out of vomit bags.

Not sure if it's the same case but I understand one if the surrogate mothers was having a baby for her boss. I really think companies should be alert to this, I'm not sure what they can do about it but it seems riven with additional possible difficulties. After all, sexual relationships between bosses and their juniors can lead to a lot of trouble. How much more complex the power issues and ethical problems relating to nine months of paid pregnancy and childbirth.

SapatSea · 14/03/2021 12:10

There is a constant stream of postive stories about surrogacy in the MSM at the moment. I wonder if "funding" is behind it. There seems to be a big push to present it in only ever a positive light with the new bill being considered by the government giving a lot of rights and protection to the "commissioning parents" from implantation onwards (under the guise of protecting the "surrogate" mother). Apart from any moral and ethical objections to surrogacy arrangements there is also the issue of commercialisation in the UK that the legislation would issue in and the strain on the NHS of picking up the tab for care. The UK could end up being a "centre" for international baby purchasing on the cheap (as the NHS would likely pick up a lot of the costs of care for the mother and babies and employers and taxpayer would be paying towards ML of a pregnant employee). So there are a lot of sommercial interests lobbying hard for regulation like California in the UK when IMHO we should be moving to the Scandanavia model of banning it.

Recently in Scotland a gay couple had the Scottish NHS fund their surrogacy as they had "a fertility problem" (i.e. not having wombs) and were deemed entitled to help having a biological child under equality legislation. I find it chilling that the NHS is funding the "renting" of a woman's womb and the "purchase of a baby."

In the past week I've come across a slew of all totally positive stories about surrogacy. Just a few examples: a 23 year old woman having a baby for a gay couple using her own egg but claims she is not the parent and didn't maternally bond with the child. Another about an office junior having a baby for her senior manager. One of the Kardashians discussing surrogacy as an option in her on/off relationship. A mother of 6 in her 40's having a baby for her gay brother.Jon Snow and his wife using a "surrogate" mother. The Baldwin story in the OP. A gay couple "welcoming" triplets. Relentless attempts at normalisation and no recognition of the risks. Women as mere incubators with no toll involved, you would think pregnancy was as easy as carrying around a small bag of potatoes for 9 months.

MissBarbary · 14/03/2021 12:08

We can’t stop what goes on in other countries, it’s nothing to do with us sadly

The "nothing to do with us" mantra has to be one of the most illogical ever made but I have to credit Flowers that it has a degree of effectiveness in closing down a debate. It's really hitting one's head against a (talking) brick wall.

FannyCann · 14/03/2021 11:14

"if he doesn't happen to want to be in a relationship with one"

"with a woman" I meant.

FannyCann · 14/03/2021 11:12

I also think there is an issue relating the surrogate mother's own children. The woman featured in this article appears to have had seven surrogate babies in eight years. She had a life threatening haemorrhage with the fifth, requiring ICU but went straight back to have another, and her seventh is due around now if it hasn't already been born, just 15 months after she gave birth to the 6th.

Meanwhile her own children have spent a huge chunk of their childhood with their mother prioritising breeding babies for strangers over their own welfare. They could have been orphaned. And honestly, however much she loves pregnancy and cruises through with no problems (really?) can she really have had the energy to devote to young children? Long walks, bike rides, playing footy in the park? All the other demands young children make on a mother? Organising childcare or taking them with her for trips to fertility clinics and antenatal care, and meeting a dizzying selection of commissioning parents keen to avail themselves of the use of their mother's body?
I don't think so.

I don't know what sex her children are but what message is she giving them. A girl growing up understanding a woman's role is to be kind and supply babies. A boy growing up knowing just how to get a baby if he doesn't happen to want to be in a relationship with one.

It's terrible. And I'm shocked and disgusted that fertility clinics and commissioning parents would ignore her brush with death and carry on using her. (I use the world "use" intentionally).

‘I love giving birth. This is my seventh surrogate baby’

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/i-love-giving-birth-this-is-my-seventh-surrogate-baby-xqfgzjwvz

NotBadConsidering · 14/03/2021 10:58

@TableFlowerss

*99.99% of surrogacy around the world is exploitative, and just because some comfortable western people feel they’re empowered and ethical in a few rare cases doesn’t change the fact that surrogacy as a whole is problematic*

This point is irrelevant to whether we make something legal or illegal. We can’t stop what goes on in other countries, it’s nothing to do with us sadly. I’ve never disagreed that it can be problematic but it’s not always the case

But the vast majority of surrogacy in the UK, the USA and other countries has the same problems. Are rich people having babies for poor people in the UK? Has a wealthy woman with disposable income and a supportive family living in a wealthy area of London decided to altruistically and with full autonomy to be a surrogate for a poor couple struggling with fertility living on a council estate in a poor area? Of course not. There is a power imbalance in “our” countries as well as “other” countries. How do you test for willingness? How do you protect against coercion? How do you safeguard the surrogate woman and her rights? I’d be genuinely interested. Because if this isn’t in place, if we have a scenario where we rely on everyone to be honest about how amazingly altruistic they’re being, inevitably someone, a surrogate woman, will be exploited because of human nature to exploit a loophole.

And even if someone IS completely willing, you’re still ignoring the fact that baby is being treated as a commodity, even if it’s just for expenses.

irishfeminist · 14/03/2021 10:54

There was a thread on Jon Snow that was taken down but he (aged 73) and his wife used a surrogate too. Horrible.

www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/jon-snow-channel-four-baby-b922941.html

TableFlowerss · 14/03/2021 10:46

99.99% of surrogacy around the world is exploitative, and just because some comfortable western people feel they’re empowered and ethical in a few rare cases doesn’t change the fact that surrogacy as a whole is problematic

This point is irrelevant to whether we make something legal or illegal. We can’t stop what goes on in other countries, it’s nothing to do with us sadly. I’ve never disagreed that it can be problematic but it’s not always the case

MissBarbary · 14/03/2021 10:43

@NotBadConsidering

Even if a you can be 100% certain that a woman is completely autonomous in her choice of using her body to be a surrogate there is still the problems of:

a baby is being traded as a commodity. A baby is bought and sold, regardless of whether it’s only “expenses” and that is something that has to be acknowledged regardless of one’s view on the autonomy of the surrogate.
it sets a precedent that makes the whole industry acceptable, meaning those women who are coerced, directly or indirectly as a result of circumstances, are vulnerable.

99.99% of surrogacy around the world is exploitative, and just because some comfortable western people feel they’re empowered and ethical in a few rare cases doesn’t change the fact that surrogacy as a whole is problematic.

Great post.

TableFlowerss · 14/03/2021 10:18

@NotBadConsidering

Even if a you can be 100% certain that a woman is completely autonomous in her choice of using her body to be a surrogate there is still the problems of:

a baby is being traded as a commodity. A baby is bought and sold, regardless of whether it’s only “expenses” and that is something that has to be acknowledged regardless of one’s view on the autonomy of the surrogate.
it sets a precedent that makes the whole industry acceptable, meaning those women who are coerced, directly or indirectly as a result of circumstances, are vulnerable.

99.99% of surrogacy around the world is exploitative, and just because some comfortable western people feel they’re empowered and ethical in a few rare cases doesn’t change the fact that surrogacy as a whole is problematic.

That’s your view and how you look at it. That’s not how those in the situation will see it. They will see it as their last hope to ever have a baby of the own and someone is willing to help facilitate this.

Thankfully no one can dictate what is good for everyone under these circumstances. Unless of course it is made illegal.

TableFlowerss · 14/03/2021 10:15

@Delphinium20

Ok, so where do stand on a woman donating a kidney to a family member or friend? Because based on your logic, that would be placing her body under unnecessary risk for the happiness of someone else? The happiness being keeping alive their loved one.

A kidney saves a life. It's not happiness or fulfillment, it's lifesaving. Very different than having a baby. The surrogate mother is not saving anyone's life, she's only risking her own.

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.

Now one of the arguments against surrogacy has been the stress the ‘host’ would be under for the happiness of someone else.

Having a kidney removed for someone ekse us to to be taken lightly and it’s not natural in same way carrying a baby. (I think it’s a great idea BTW that people should be given the chance of life by a loved one donating)

So if it follows the same logic that it should be someone’s choice to help a loved one or not.

TableFlowerss · 14/03/2021 10:06

@Meredithgrey1

Oh yes, because euthanasia is a great idea (not),

I find it surprising that you’re against euthanasia Tables, as the arguments you having been making for surrogacy can be made for euthanasia eg it’s a person’s right to choose it for themselves, and just because there may be exploitation of it, it doesn’t take away that absolute right of a person to make their own decision about something that affects them.

I’m guessing you might think of some individual examples where euthanasia may be the right thing for an individual to choose, however I’m assuming (correct me if I’m wrong) that your objection to it comes from the capacity for exploitation and the need for the law to protect those who would be vulnerable. Why does the law not need to do this in the case of surrogacy?

I’m not saying I’m against euthanasia in all circumstances, I was simply illustrating that just because something is legal in one country, doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a good idea.

Regarding your last question, I don’t think surrogacy is always a good idea but that doesn’t mean to say that it’s always a bad idea either.

I think each case should be taken on it’s own merits

TableFlowerss · 14/03/2021 09:50

@zzizzer

Oh dear. There's no point saying the same thing over and over at someone who's just ignoring every logical query being put their way.

Tables, you show absolutely fuck-all knowledge of attachment disorders in any of your posts.

I am genuinely, 100% disturbed that you say this was a feature of your degree but you cannot understand how removing a newborn from their mother could affect them. Really, it's actually disturbing. You should ask for a refund from the university.

So I'm hiding this thread now - best of luck with the lunacy everyone else.

Attachment disorder is something that can happen to anyone under the right (or wrong) circumstances!! So banging on about that because you’ve heard it as an argument put forward and using it as a reason to not allow surrogacy under any circumstances and then getting annoyed because someone doesn’t view it the same is a bit errr childish!

BenoneBeauty · 14/03/2021 09:44

Very well said @NotBadConsidering

NotBadConsidering · 14/03/2021 08:26

Even if a you can be 100% certain that a woman is completely autonomous in her choice of using her body to be a surrogate there is still the problems of:

a baby is being traded as a commodity. A baby is bought and sold, regardless of whether it’s only “expenses” and that is something that has to be acknowledged regardless of one’s view on the autonomy of the surrogate.
it sets a precedent that makes the whole industry acceptable, meaning those women who are coerced, directly or indirectly as a result of circumstances, are vulnerable.

99.99% of surrogacy around the world is exploitative, and just because some comfortable western people feel they’re empowered and ethical in a few rare cases doesn’t change the fact that surrogacy as a whole is problematic.

MsTSwift · 14/03/2021 08:12

Agree with everything except Tables posts dear me. The lack of critical thinking is embarrassing to read from someone (allegedly) tertiary educated. Diet of women’s magazines nails it.

Meredithgrey1 · 14/03/2021 08:08

Oh yes, because euthanasia is a great idea (not),

I find it surprising that you’re against euthanasia Tables, as the arguments you having been making for surrogacy can be made for euthanasia eg it’s a person’s right to choose it for themselves, and just because there may be exploitation of it, it doesn’t take away that absolute right of a person to make their own decision about something that affects them.

I’m guessing you might think of some individual examples where euthanasia may be the right thing for an individual to choose, however I’m assuming (correct me if I’m wrong) that your objection to it comes from the capacity for exploitation and the need for the law to protect those who would be vulnerable. Why does the law not need to do this in the case of surrogacy?

zzizzer · 14/03/2021 08:01

Oh dear. There's no point saying the same thing over and over at someone who's just ignoring every logical query being put their way.

Tables, you show absolutely fuck-all knowledge of attachment disorders in any of your posts.

I am genuinely, 100% disturbed that you say this was a feature of your degree but you cannot understand how removing a newborn from their mother could affect them. Really, it's actually disturbing. You should ask for a refund from the university.

So I'm hiding this thread now - best of luck with the lunacy everyone else.

MsTSwift · 14/03/2021 07:14

I actually think the euthanasia analogy works quite well. It would be right in some circumstances and not allowing does have cruel outcomes for some families. However the law needs to ban it to protect the majority because if it is allowed and becomes widespread that’s a frightening outcome.

Delphinium20 · 14/03/2021 00:26

Ok, so where do stand on a woman donating a kidney to a family member or friend? Because based on your logic, that would be placing her body under unnecessary risk for the happiness of someone else? The happiness being keeping alive their loved one.

A kidney saves a life. It's not happiness or fulfillment, it's lifesaving. Very different than having a baby. The surrogate mother is not saving anyone's life, she's only risking her own.

TableFlowerss · 13/03/2021 22:34

@OhHolyJesus

Now your posts are just getting silly

As a PP noted the same to you earlier, I think we past 'silly' some time ago.

I won’t lose sleep over that given the nonsense that’s been plastered on this thread!

OhHolyJesus · 13/03/2021 22:12

Now your posts are just getting silly

As a PP noted the same to you earlier, I think we past 'silly' some time ago.

TableFlowerss · 13/03/2021 22:11

@OhHolyJesus

Right to use her body as a surrogate is legal currently despite your interpretation

Correcting it for you. Right to use her body as a surrogate is legal currently despite my opinion.

The law is clear, commercial surrogacy is illegal so the question over what constitutes a legitimate pregnancy expense remains. People interpret legitimate expenses in different ways, for example:

As a result of being pregnant do you need a gardener? If so, why are women who are pregnant but who are keeping their babies not provided one on the NHS?

Now your posts are just getting silly 🙃

OhHolyJesus · 13/03/2021 20:42

Right to use her body as a surrogate is legal currently despite your interpretation

Correcting it for you. Right to use her body as a surrogate is legal currently despite my opinion.

The law is clear, commercial surrogacy is illegal so the question over what constitutes a legitimate pregnancy expense remains. People interpret legitimate expenses in different ways, for example:

As a result of being pregnant do you need a gardener? If so, why are women who are pregnant but who are keeping their babies not provided one on the NHS?