Surrogacy ends in abortion and ends a friendship

I wonder what would happen in these cases, and commercial surrogacy cases, if the genetic parents want a termination but the surrogate doesn't and yet doesn't want to keep the baby either. There are so many ethical minefields around surrogacy.

Probably not, but they bloody well should. There's a horrible case of a little girl born in to American parents, who have refused to take her because she is disabled. Poor child is considered stateless because she isn't considered to have the nationality of the surrogate mum and is stuck in the care system. In some countries it's very clear that the surrogate is not the legal parent. The USA should be compelled to take the child and pursue legal measures against the 'parents'.

Do the campaigners for binding contracts say they should apply equally on the intending parent or couple, so that they would have to accept any children born under the contract? (And if not then the woman could sue them?)
Or is it only ever a woman’s body that is subject to terms of a legal contract?

Surrogacy in any form is an ethical minefield; it should be completely banned.

@FannyCann Thanks for posting that case.

The shift in attitude and entitlement is very high as we're seeing, even in cases of so-called altruistic surrogacy.
Somehow engaging with surrogate mum to provide a baby is treated a bit like a consumer order - a bit complex, other parties involved.
However, the entitlement over another woman's body and wishes is awful. Surrogate mums are assumed to have no agenct whatsoever when they are pregnant.
How is this not coercive practice?

MrsHunt

While many people are against surrogacy for just some of those reasons, ALL of those reasons illustrate why it's so problematic.

I would absolutely agree that commissioning parents should not be given parental rights over a baby that exists in another woman's body. The absolute mess that would result in if there's a difference of opinion during pregnancy. Very dangerous for women's bodily autonomy.

Personally, I consider changing your mind and keeping a baby that isn't genetically yours to be unethical - so we need to make sure that women really are fully counselled before entering into this.

I would also take the opposite approach, for two reasons.

1). Because of the physical and psychological effect of going through pregnancy, which can’t really be predicted.

2). Because, regardless of the law (and as with all men), the commissioning parents can absolve themselves of responsibility by simply disappearing.

I think surrogacy is a major case of just because we can do something, doesn't mean we should.

It's fraught with difficulties, and whilst the reasons for wanting a child via surrogacy are, I am sure, many and complex, no-one 'needs' to have a child.

I think all surrogacy should be banned everywhere.

Becoming a parent is not a right.

I read a comment from a celeb recently who is widely believed to have used a surrogate mother to provide her with a baby. She said something like 'a beautiful little blessing has chosen me to be her mother'.
And it's striking how that statement is the complete opposite of the truth.
The baby, which based on the celeb's age likely is NOT even from the biological egg of this celeb, has had no choice in the matter at all.
As far as that baby is concerned, she was created purposefully to order, to be removed from her mother at birth or soon after.

None of that was her 'choice'.

THAT is a bad idea.

In some theoretical world where there weren't myriad ethical minefields around every single aspect of it - consent, physical health, birth, motherhood, breakdown of relationships, changing of minds - I would have nothing against surrogacy. But we're in the real world, and I'm finding it more and more unbelievable that we are seeing these nightmare scenarios playing out and yet people are fine with it? There's no thought for the babies being born either.

Fertility is declining, people are not able to have babies for all kinds of reasons, I feel huge sympathy - but this is not the answer.

Me too.

I'm entirely comfortable with banning all surrogacy.

I’ve never been pregnant and don’t have children (or want them) so I offer my opinion with some circumspection, but I see it exactly the opposite. I think the person who grew the child in her body has more claim to be the mother than the genetic mother. This is partly because of the unbreakable bond that relationship creates, but also/mainly because most of the substance of that child, what the child is, comes from her body. She’s not just an incubator: she is providing every bit of the nutrients that go into making the child in an absolutely unique way.

This whole thing is a mess. We don't, as a society, seem to have any clear agreement on what constitutes a mother. If a woman gets pregnant using donor eggs, that woman has no more connection to the baby than a surrogate pregnant with couple's embryo, yet in one case the woman would be considered the mother and in the second case, maybe not (depending on where she lives).
I would consider a baby that was made from my DNA to be mine, regardless of who was pregnant with that baby, but not everyone does. I'd be absolutely heartbroken if a woman who actively volunteered to act as a surrogate for me then chose to terminate. Unless we are going to ban it (which is the best outcome imo) then we do need to update laws.
Personally, I consider changing your mind and keeping a baby that isn't genetically yours to be unethical - so we need to make sure that women really are fully counselled before entering into this. Equally we need to prevent couples from ignoring the needs of the woman pg with their baby from treating her like a commodity. I'm not sure how to do that, outside of banning it completely. It does feel like people are buying babies. And no one is thinking about how babies bond.
There used to be a great documentary on YouTube about the industry in the Ukraine - I really recommend watching it.

God, that poor child. Do you know what country that's from, OhHoly?

This must be seen as a sign that not all is rosy when people 'commission' children in this way. We are seeing more and more negative outcomes. And to think there people out there who will cancel their 'orders'. These are infants, they are human beings. Not an accessory.

That screenshot is heartbreaking. what a mess.

This is the thing about the Law Commission proposals to give commissioning parents legal parentage before birth. They claim this will make surrogate mothers feel safer
They also state that in situations where the CPs renege on the deal then social services will step in the same as they do for any other new mother/parents who reject their baby. So it makes no different except the CPs will have to take time out from their grand new plans to sign off the papers. Should the SM decide to step up to her responsibilities to the baby she has carried and keep it I'm not sure if that will be straightforward paperwork or if it will be more complex given she won't be the legal parent. I don't recall seeing anything in the consultation paper that mentioned that but since it was a 500 page paper I probably missed it. It would be ironic if a woman was to give birth to a baby she had decided to keep and social workers stepped in and took it to a foster home while they decided if she actually could keep it or if they had other adoptive parents lined up.