To not understand the issue with surrogacy?

Indeed. Most children adopted are not babies.

But in the UK money doesn’t change hands with adoption.

It's a completely different situation!

The US adoption system has some major issues too!

Removing a baby from its mother is a traumatic event for both.

Creating babies who will be subject to trauma as soon as they are born is a horrific thing to do.

Surrogacy is commercialised in many countries. How many rich women do you suppose act as surrogates in those countries, & how many infertile women in poverty receive the precious gift of a baby?

In countries where it is not commercialised, why is surrogacy much less common? Why?

How is renting a woman's body for 9 months different to renting it for half an hour? They are both financial transactions to which the woman has, presumably, consented.

And yes, women and babies die in pregnancy & labour, even now, in first world countries. I nearly died at birth, as did my mother. DD & I nearly died when she was born.

So how about if it was a rich couple using another rich woman as a surrogate - would that be viewed in a better way?

It doesn't happen or if it does it's vanishingly rare.

It's all about what the adults want, not about the child at all.

Even UK surrogacy often involves quite high ‘expenses’.

Even if their were an odd few who did it for a family member etc and not for money, most will be poor women with little choice and women being exploited and farmed like animals to produce babies for anyone with enough cash to pay for them.

You are also assuming that all babies bought are bought with good intentions.

Buying and selling humans of any age is abhorrent.

Yes, can’t really have true ‘consent’ if money and/or loss of bodily autonomy is involved.

*like an item.

Either for sale or as a gift.

Surrogacy is a process which does not consider the mother and baby at its very heart. Abandoned babies suffer terribly psychologically, even if they have good carers. To deliberately separate a baby from its mother soon after birth is psychologically damaging. It ignores the bond newborns have with their mother and the importance of breast feeding (where possible) www.routledge.com/Why-Love-Matters-How-affection-shapes-a-babys-brain/Gerhardt/p/book/9780415870535?gclid=CjwKCAiAzrWOBhBjEiwAq85QZzmRf7WB24FppLL6mMdGtdLi1nbWUrNH_iUED3FOSG0NLSMegtOb3BoCWEEQAvD_BwE

There is no consideration given to the child, being denied it's right to a biological family, it's all about creating a baby to order. If the wannabe parent had any interest in children's welfare, they could adopt.

Surrogacy treats humans, both mothers and babies, as a commodity, which is ethically questionable. It objectifies mothers and treats them as 'an incubator'. This objectification, the reduction to no more than a thing, is surely damaging to all women. As such, I cannot see how it has a place in civilised society.

You say what if all parties consent? Who’s asking the baby? He or she is a person too but being treated by an item.

I think OP that when a lot of people hear 'surrogacy' they think about the current British model - the kind of thing you read about in the paper where a sister has had a baby for her sister. This is heavily regulated in the UK and, by law, hardly any money changes hands and the baby is part of a wider family and still in contact with their surrogate. I don't think many people have an issue with this, it's not something that would upset me as a person or a feminist.

But the kind of surrogacy that is becoming more and more prevalent is where rich people from the UK pay for surrogacy from abroad, where it is much, much more of a commercial enterprise. There is a huge power imbalance, and essentially it's baby farming. There was a terrible story in lockdown about a nursery full of babies just being left alone in their cots because their 'parents' couldn't get into the country because of lockdown. There was also another extremely disturbing story about an Australian 'parent' refusing to take a surrogate baby because the baby had been born with a disability. That's just two stories from an issue that's becoming increasingly commodified.

surely with something like this as long as there is full consent from all parties it should be fine?

what is consent? in most cases money changes hands

can I buy you? why not?

can I buy a ten year old? a five year old? a two year old?

at what age does it become not OK for a person to be for sale?

So how about if it was a rich couple using another rich woman as a surrogate - would that be viewed in a better way

Thin end of the wedge right there.

What is actually happening is that poorer women with fewer economic opportunities in Eastern Europe (Ukraine for example) and Asia (India for example) are being paid to participate in a risky proposition, pregnancy is inherently risky in terms of both morbidity and mortality especially in poorer countries to make available babies for rich western people. It is exploitation. Among many other issues for the children which we have already experienced in countries where forced adoptions took place widely in the past.

one side. Curse the speelchock