To not understand the issue with surrogacy?

That dreadful picture/ad by Extraordinary Conceptions!! (above, posted by FannyCann)

That couple are not even holding the baby properly, it's at arm's length and it looks as if they are just about to drop it. Which one of them is supposed to be holding it? Do they think that it is a doll? Why are they waving toys in the face of a newborn??

That couple should not be in charge of a hamster

Means. Not needs!

I agree.

'From each, according to his needs, to each according to how loud he shouts about it on social media'

I find it hard to comprehend people on the (sometimes hard) left advocating for surrogacy for this reason

That's because the rhetoric changed from everyone should get what they need to everyone must get what they want coupled with the fact that the ones with the most power, the loudest voices,the most wealth are never women so their wants and even needs are low low down on the list if they even feature at all.

[quote FannyCann]Just wanted to post this prize winning essay which I think gives an excellent explanation of the feminist view point.

I particularly like her closing paragraph.

"Law and policy is developing and changing across the world and it is vital that the rights of women and children are always the foremost consideration. I have argued for an abolitionist approach because a regulatory harm reduction approach does not advance the aim of feminism. Industrialising patriarchal norms is not compatible with a political movement that demands the emancipation of all women. Feminism cannot succeed by sacrificing the most disenfranchised women to patriarchy, restricting its interest to making improvements to the conditions of their abuse. Surrogacy must be prohibited."

objectnow.org/how-do-altruistic-and-commercial-surrogacy-affect-the-rights-of-women-and-children/[/quote]
I think that sums it up well for me.

Surrogacy sits at the cross roads of ultra capitalism where anything (or anyone) can be bought or sold and anti-feminism (where women are particularly vulnerable for a number of reasons).

I find it hard to comprehend people on the (sometimes hard) left advocating for surrogacy for this reason

Just wanted to post this prize winning essay which I think gives an excellent explanation of the feminist view point.

I particularly like her closing paragraph.

"Law and policy is developing and changing across the world and it is vital that the rights of women and children are always the foremost consideration. I have argued for an abolitionist approach because a regulatory harm reduction approach does not advance the aim of feminism. Industrialising patriarchal norms is not compatible with a political movement that demands the emancipation of all women. Feminism cannot succeed by sacrificing the most disenfranchised women to patriarchy, restricting its interest to making improvements to the conditions of their abuse. Surrogacy must be prohibited."

objectnow.org/how-do-altruistic-and-commercial-surrogacy-affect-the-rights-of-women-and-children/

Unfortunately those vulnerable women seem to be not worthy of protection if they consent.

By some people, I need to add for clarity.

Unfortunately those vulnerable women seem to be not worthy of protection if they consent.

All through this thread, I have seen a confusion as to what coercion is and a lack of understanding of power imbalance and how that effects consent.

Surrogacy is one of those instances in life where even the most edge case where consent has been influenced by any coercive force needs to be addressed. Because, this is absolutely exploiting at least one woman’s body for the purpose of having children.

@FannyCann
There will be a cohort of women of child-bearing age whose personal lives have left them emotionally and financially vulnerable. It's easy to see how they could be pulled into this, particularly if they are lone parents, have significant debt etc.

Earlier in the thread Star said surrogacy is OK because it doesn't always go wrong. I asked her if drink driving is OK because that doesn't always result in an accident and she dismissed it as a ridiculous comparison so I'm some what amused to see she uses driving as an analogy during her (presumably drunk) rambles last night.

Surrogacy centres the desires of the commissioning parents above all else. The child is involved in this issue is presented as a commodity, the subject of a contract. I saw this in an Independent article from many years ago, it has still stuck with me.

Should children be the subject of a contract?

When some of us compare this with adoption in the UK, involving statutory authorities and the courts, we have to remember that this process centres the child.
It's not an easy process but is about the making the best of a difficult situation. The child is already here and how best can their welfare needs be met outside of the birth family. The courts and local authorities are involved and rightly so.

Surrogacy involves little, if any safeguarding and does not centre the child.

Surrogacy is sold as "a gift of love" (see advertisements on Instagram from the agency Extraordinary Conceptions for instance) but they don't receive that love, or even basic respect, in return.

Worse, they are often treated with contempt.

Probably by people who wouldn't dream of eating a battery farmed egg.

1.make things sound clinical and more importantly like a legal contract and a lot of the people will either glaze over or think well it must be ok and fair because legalese.

1. it negates any of the bonds between mother and baby, the "work" put in and the associated risks.

3.by dehumanising these women it becomes all about choice and the end product so all the risks and issues can easily be glossed over.

And this is from California. That entire article was a lesson in what comes about with the detachment of terms from ‘mother’.

Third party reproducers, gestators, the lot.

For "open to negotiation" I think we can safely read "less aware of her rights/easier to bully"

This makes me feel ill. We probably all know women who have had traumatic births and are still dealing with the physical and mental consequences today. The idea that anyone would be trying to negotiate down a price for that is beyond disturbing.

Also posting a link to this excellent article

verilymag.com/2021/01/surrogacy-altruistic-commercial-exploitation-women-children-2021

I'm reposting this as it is likely lost in the depths of the whataboutery.
Thank you for posting @zweisamkeit

Of course this where commercial surrogacy leads. Negotiating with surrogate mothers (sorry, carriers) to get the costs down.

"we gravitated toward a first-timer, with the rationale that the compensation was significantly less (about $20,000), she would be anxious to get started (read: open to negotiation)"

For "open to negotiation" I think we can safely read "less aware of her rights/easier to bully"

www.fertilityiq.com/topics/cost/how-i-saved-usd50-000-on-surrogacy

There is also some discussion about how she saved money on medical insurance with the second surrogacy. For various reasons she decided that medical costs were low in early pregnancy and so arranged to pay direct until 24 weeks and then instigate a policy.
She was lucky. That was a massive gamble. If her surrogate mother had had a septic miscarriage or pulmonary embolus for instance she could have found herself paying out huge amounts.

I got to about post 400 before skipping to post and can see the direction changed somewhat but what I was going to say...
I know a gay couple who have used surrogates and are very active campaigners for surrogacy reform etc. I also know they are both having multiple affairs via Grindr etc. I do wonder how long it will be before their perfect image they are building up comes crashing down and what will happen to the poor kids then and with the rise in surrogacy what will happen when these cases come to divorce etc.
Secondly the surrogates they have used do not have jobs. £20k expenses to someone without a job is a lot of money.

*Here it’s completely to the extreme, goes on for days an days until silly o’clock and I’ve literally never known that in about 21 months of very active posts etc…

Part of me thinks I like the dedication to the cause that you bring but part of me thinks the average person is put off by the extremities and the constantly going on and on and on and on

I don’t know whether it’s to admired or embarrassed about. But I do think aside for the hardcore 15 posters or so most people can’t be bothered with it.

Sadly that bulldozer mentality (I’m 100% right all of the time) detracts from
Issues that affect every woman, ie the concept that a man can change sex and the problems that brings( sharing a changing room etc)*

Funny. Coming from someone with that terrier like ability to just keep coming back for another bite!

I am a SAHM and an adopter (although obviously one whose issues with surrogacy mean I want to leave the 'poor little souls'.with 'smackheads') so I am not sure that Starcup has us all pegged exactly right

I think the issues happen when you can't imagine a world in which someone doesn't fall into the stereotype you have created for them in your head. In this case 'lefty feminist' I assume. Hence the really weird bit about the M25

@Blackbird1234

I hope you are ok OP and haven't been too bothered by multiple and frequent notifications of new posts! I also hope you have enjoyed the discussion.

I have also found this thread useful, the OP has already said she has too and any lurkers will have the arguments laid before them and can read the counter argument, or try to gather pieces of that together in amongst the Whataboutery.

As for whataboutery, it can be useful as it can highlight other related topics. Though separate, there are links or similarities with IVF and adoption and as we near 1k (which I don't think a surrogacy thread has ever done) I look forward to new threads on the feminism board to discuss:

IVF
Adoption
Laws and how they are made
Safeguarding
The billion dollar global fertility industry
Donor gamete registers
Donor gametes research, risks and regulation
Prolific sperm donors
Genealogical bewilderment
Donor conceived children
Surrogate born children (and where the two collide)
Human trafficking and specifically the baby trade (via abductions, international 'adoption', surrogacy)
Genetic engineering and bioethics
Counselling for surrogate mothers

We could also have ones on organ donation, abortion and the sex trade as they also come up via Whataboutery.

Perhaps Star could start one on one of these areas, lay out her thoughts in the OP and ask questions and engage in good faith whilst holding onto the sarcasm and misogyny. Or someone else could.

I'm fascinated by surrogacy, despite having not been a surrogate mother or having obtained a child via surrogacy and so I'm always up for a thread exploring surrogacy.

Thanks again to the OP for starting this thread. If you can come back and let us know what you've gathered from it that would be great, even if it's not much, I for one would be really interested in hearing what you think before the thread closes.

starcup

Your driving analogy is excellent and very applicable here.

No, we don't ban driving because some people die/are injured.

Neither do we leave it to everyone to drive how they like

You have to be (in the uk) 17, have a licence, drive on the left, obey the speed limit, be below the permitted blood alcohol limit, etc...

We don't just say drive how you like, it's a free choice, you do you, etc.

We accept some curtailment of our freedom to drive however we like in order to ensure that the roads are safe as they can be for all.

To refresh my mind, I read back the poster’s first few posts.

The snide generalisations started around their second post.

The point being, if it’s all about the best interests of the child, then half of the people on here will have brought a baby in to the world under less than ideal circumstances.

And it descended into whataboutery with that post onwards. So many of the ‘Whatabout’ situations answered with care, knowledge and logic. Including the ‘what about the sperm donor’s health’… in other words, what about the men.

It actually was an interesting thread, because it brought out a range of opinions and discussed them. Hypocritically, the only person calling out people for their opinions, telling people how abhorrent or extreme their opinion was, was ‘star’.

Reading back many posters were calling out the attempts to derail away from the surrogacy discussion through the constant ‘what about this then’ when it devolved into areas that were about other issues and family situations and not surrogacy. Often posters did this while still answering the ‘Whatabout’ questions or situations.

Thank you OP, I learned a lot of extra information on this thread from seeing new links posted.

Are you mad or delirious?

Ooo just spotted this gem.

Women saying no they don't like surrogacy are ccrrrraazzzzzyyyyyy.

Crazy extremists.

Ah the whiff of misogyny. The rules of misogyny are always right. The reason being they hold a torch to the truth.

I follow the power of the truth to highlight injustice.

Not the power of the lobby groups full of gobby people making demands.

Nice to see you just blabbering on about safeguarding being extremist and therefore surrogacy is ok after I went to bed.

Safeguarding used to be all the rage and the key point about protecting human rights. Now apparently it gets in the way of 'rights'.

The reality is that the wants of the privileged have been dressed up as rights, whilst the rights of the vulnerable have been dressed up as unimportant or an inconvenience with safeguarding of the vulnerable represented as extremism rather than simply a recognition of those making demands at the expense of other exploiting them in the process.

Until someone can properly explain why protecting women and children from the exploitation of the rich is a good thing, I will continue with the wisdom of safeguarding which has been pretty damn mainstream since WWII rather than regressing to victorian ideals of morality and the concept that the poor deserved it somehow.