Another surrogacy nightmare

It's so noticeable the way the Irish media interviews those who have bought babies and not asking any hard questions of the baby buyers. However on parenting sites there are a lot of women not happy at how the interviews are conducted.

Sadly yes, we are a very sentimental lot and love a good sob story. That is admirable and right much of the time, most certainly not in this case. Sometimes we are so open minded, so keen to show how far we have come the awful things that were done in the past, our brains fall out. Ironically, this surrogacy business belongs in exactly the same space as previous horrors, with a similar lack of care for children and vulnerable women.

Elton John is probably a prime example, I am glad he has been able to have a child with his longterm partner.

And does it occur to anyone else that there is a bit of a power issue here. Imagine being the woman who is forever tied to Elton John through being the surrogate of Elton John's children. That could be a pretty huge motivator for a woman to consent to her exploitation.

As a surrogate, she says her connection to the baby currently growing inside her is nothing like the motherly love she felt when she carried her own 3-year-old twins.

I find this sad as well. When a baby is born, they only know their mother, they recognise her voice and her smell.
Imagine growing up knowing your mother disconnected herself from you like this.
Maybe it's not a problem and it's all roses, I doubt it though.

Yes.

And this can happen to any altruistic surrogate too.

And what then happens if it is the pregnancy that has caused that woman to be in a situation where end-of-life decisions need to made.

This is really ignored when people focus on the 'the couple gets a child' aspect and not the actuality of the toll this can take on the woman being exploited. (Even if they are consenting to that very exploitation, their bodies are being exploited as a resource for the desires of another person.)

“As a surrogate, she says her connection to the baby currently growing inside her is nothing like the motherly love she felt when she carried her own 3-year-old twins. This is a job, and as part of that job, she signed a contract to let the baby’s parents make medical choices for her, including whether to get the COVID-19 vaccine.”

Oh my goodness, she really has gone all the way in giving up her bodily autonomy on this! To suppress your natural maternal feelings towards the baby you are carrying and not to get vaccinated on the say so of the people paying you seems to be giving up a lot.

Would she also have agreed to the termination if requested? Giving away the decision on whether the baby dies based on something that seems so arbitrary as a vaccination of the mother?I feel like she has lost something fundamental in this. Mind blowing.

I understand not everyone will agree and I respect your opinions. I don't particularly enjoy being roasted on MN but that is my personal opinion.

You are on a feminist board on mumsnet. I am not quite sure why you would think that the exploitative nature of reproduction on demand through the use of another woman's body for either eggs or to carry a child would not be an issue that is discussed.

Or do you just look at the glamourised stories and not actually think about the women's bodies being exploited.

Surrogacy has been around for decades, I genuinely did not realise it was such a hot potato! Elton John is probably a prime example, I am glad he has been able to have a child with his longterm partner.

So, two males used a surrogate to have a child and a woman's body and life was put at risk to do this and you think this should be celebrated. And if that woman then suffered life long health issues due to that pregnancy? Still to be celebrated?

There are other means for people to have children in their lives, even for gay couples. Exploiting women's bodies is not acceptable no matter how rich the purchasers.

And perhaps you really should listen to the children who have been born from surrogacy when they reach adulthood and process that they were produced on demand and separated from the mother that carried them, the mother whose body created them.

Surrogacy is never child centred. It is only ever about the needs of the adults.

she is a Canadian woman who loves being pregnant and all the attention that brings, and her expenses come to 30,000USD, then it is a very kind thing she has done. She has chosen to do it and that is her right.

So, someone has exploited her 'love' of attention for being pregnant to have a child on demand. And that doesn't sound like there could be an issue there? You put it down to kindness, yet tell us she loves the attention she gets....

Extract from Vice News of all places, which is hardly a bastion of women's rights advocacy.

As a health care worker, Jordan McCutcheon could get the COVID-19 vaccine anytime she wants. But the 28-year-old dental assistant turned that decision over to someone else: the parents of the baby she’s been carrying for almost five months.

McCutcheon, who lives in Marietta, Ohio, jokingly calls herself a “rent-a-womb.” As a surrogate, she says her connection to the baby currently growing inside her is nothing like the motherly love she felt when she carried her own 3-year-old twins. This is a job, and as part of that job, she signed a contract to let the baby’s parents make medical choices for her, including whether to get the COVID-19 vaccine.

(Continues)

Victoria Ferrara, founder of Worldwide Surrogacy, which has offices in Connecticut and New York, told VICE News that a pregnant surrogate working with her agency had the chance to get vaccinated because she works in health care. But she turned it down, because the baby’s mother didn’t want her to get the shot.

“The intended mother was going so far as to ask me if the surrogate actually got the vaccine, could she then turn around and request a termination of the pregnancy,” Ferrara said. “It just really exemplified, for me, that severe level of anxiety that some people have.”

From www.vice.com/en/article/qjpqe3/parents-are-demanding-surrogates-who-wont-get-the-covid-vaccine

Doesn't the respect for women's autonomy just oooze out of these passages? Something is oozing, certainly.

If every woman should have the choice what she does with her own body, then that is another point against commercial surrogacy, because that is not how surrogacy contracts are drafted.

extract from Jennifer Lahl's twitter
I read lots of surrogacy contracts. One of the most egregious things included was asking the surrogate mother to waive her end-of-life decision-making so the people buying the babies cd decide if/when life support was terminated. Surrogate had nvr met these ppl.

Twitter

Jennifer.went on to clarify in response to questions that this woman had a husband to act as next of kin. The commissioning buyers still expected their decision to over-ride all others.

And she was married and her husband could not even step in and say woah!

And even if every hour was fully paid for it doesn't make it right.

I know you weren't suggesting full payment makes it right, but mentioning it just in case Nic thinks it does.

I think that every woman has the right to choose what to do with her own body, whether that be have an abortion, work as a sex worker or become a surrogate

There are restrictions placed on men and women about what they can do with their own bodies. These restrictions exist for societal good and for individual protection. They vary from country to country.

And don't get me started on "sex work" and viewing that in a vacuum , ignoring the wider societal implications.

If, as in my friend's example, she is a Canadian woman who loves being pregnant and all the attention that brings, and her expenses come to 30,000USD, then it is a very kind thing she has done. She has chosen to do it and that is her right. The baby that is born will be very much loved. I don't believe any exploitation as such has taken place.

A paltry amount. Depending on province, the legal minimum wage in Canada varies between $13 Canadian dollars and $16 Canadian dollars per hour, according to srv116.services.gc.ca/dimt-wid/sm-mw/rpt1.aspx?lang=eng#ftb2-ref

As wikipedia phrases it, this means Assuming a 40-hour workweek and 52 paid weeks per year, the annual gross employment income of an individual earning the minimum wage in Canada is between C$27,040 (in Saskatchewan) and C$33,280 (in Nunavut).[4]

Pregnant women are subject to the physiological demands of pregnancy for 168 hours a week. You do not get a weekend off morning sickness, you cannot temporarily pause gestation on Fridays so you can go out and get drunk without the alcohol affecting the baby.

Surrogacy has been around for decades, I genuinely did not realise it was such a hot potato! Elton John is probably a prime example, I am glad he has been able to have a child with his longterm partner.

Slavery was around for decades that was also the buying and selling of humans so if that's not OK why is surrogacy?

and if medical science can help people to achieve that, without harming anyone

Medical science can only do so much. A womans body is still needed to carry and birth the child. As with all pregnancies there's a risk to the mother and baby especially if the birth is happening in a developing country (1 in 76 results in death) and especially if it is a multiple pregnancy.

While you are of course entitled to your opinion I find it shocking that after the 100 of years women have fought to be accepted as more than our reproductive capabilities you believe it is ok for women and babies to be bought and sold especially in order to meet the wants of men.

Aah the privilege of thinking that every decision a woman makes is a free choice, rather than a decision made in response to circumstances, coercion, poverty, abuse, trauma, conflict, hunger, mental illness …etc.

Sadly, the one person who has absolutely no say in their procurement or subsequent sale is the baby.
yes, women have an absolute right to do what they want with their body. But a baby isn’t ‘their body’. It’s the baby’s body!

This woman has been massively exploited for her cheap black labour by a couple of white men and you think that's fine @NicLondon1?

And what about the babies? It cannot be anything other than traumatic to be removed from your mother at birth and knowing that you are being raised by people who bought you from her.

Adoption is traumatising enough. To deliberately remove babies and introduce primal trauma because of a selfish desire to be genetically related to your child is disgusting.

I think that every woman has the right to choose what to do with her own body, whether that be have an abortion, work as a sex worker or become a surrogate.

If, as in my friend's example, she is a Canadian woman who loves being pregnant and all the attention that brings, and her expenses come to 30,000USD, then it is a very kind thing she has done. She has chosen to do it and that is her right. The baby that is born will be very much loved. I don't believe any exploitation as such has taken place.

Having your own child is an incredibly wonderful and privileged thing, and if medical science can help people to achieve that, without harming anyone, then why not. I see it as an extension of birth control, assisted fertility and IVF; all of which we use in our society to help infertile couples achieve their dream of having a child.

Obviously where exploitation does take place that needs to be stamped out.

I understand not everyone will agree and I respect your opinions. I don't particularly enjoy being roasted on MN but that is my personal opinion.

Surrogacy has been around for decades, I genuinely did not realise it was such a hot potato! Elton John is probably a prime example, I am glad he has been able to have a child with his longterm partner.

Do you honestly think that having a child is a right?

Do you honestly think that exploiting a woman's body to achieve having a family is a right?

I think you said that you have had children yourself, what do you think happens in even a wonderful loving family when a sister or a friend is a surrogate and something goes wrong. Either with the pregnancy or the surrogate's health. Do you think that any woman's health should be risked to provide another person a child?

As it happens, issues have happened and caused family division. Sisters have become significantly disabled and not been able to care then for their OWN children.

So, do I think that even a woman who 'loves' being pregnant should have their love of being pregnant exploited to provide another person a child on demand? No.

And there are cases where women who have mental health issues around pregnancy have also been exploited, even when they have had significant life threatening issues while carrying a surrogate child but then sign up for another.

What about those woman?

Can you also honestly say that there is no emotional co-ercion at play with siblings and friends who volunteer to carry the child? How is that assessed? Who is going to be 100% honest when relationships are so complex?

No. No person has a right to exploit another woman's body to produce a child.

And maybe you should also then read the stories of the poor health outcomes of some the women donating eggs as well. The effects of hyper stimulating a woman to produce as many eggs as she can can be devastating. And while in this country it is better regulated, it certainly isn't in other countries.

In the Mirror article, he says that all he came home with were 3 birth certificates. From reading the excellent article @TheClogLady posted, I would be surprised if they went through the complex court process required (dna tests etc) or if they've just gotten fake birth certs like they describe this Australian couple having gotten

africauncensored.online/hard-labour-the-surrogacy-industry-in-kenya-part-ii/

"For gay Australian commissioning parents Ryan and James (thought to be their real first names), their experience in Kenya was hellish. The couple were stranded in the country after Wankhede’s Become Parents agency allegedly provided them with “not one, but two fake birth certificates” that their embassy rejected.

Their baby was born in 2018. They claim the surrogate provided fake details that were entered in the birth notification. The notification details helped generate the birth certificate.

After providing the certificates to the embassy for the baby’s passport and citizenship application, the embassy claimed they were fake and refused to assist.

“It soon hit the couple that their situation was dire. They were stranded with a 5-month-old across the globe in a third world country with no timeframe for when they could get out,” according to a blogpost about their experience that was posted by someone called Jet Lake in 2019.

According to the blog, they confronted Wankhede, who reportedly replied: “My agency had tasked obtaining the BC [birth certificate] through a local contact person, and I cannot reach him at present”.

It seems the illegal practice of bypassing Kenya’s birth registration requirements in order to smooth the path for foreign surrogates (see previous section) may have come back to haunt Become Parents and their unsuspecting clients.

Wankhede would later claim that “the certificate just wasn’t processed correctly by Kenyan Authorities and a new certificate was being generated”. But this, too, was reportedly rejected as a fake by the Australian High Commission.

The increasingly panicked couple then visited the Department of Civil Registration seeking help themselves, but found none. Going to court was riskier, their lawyer told them. They had a high chance of losing the child to the state because of their “illegal” marital status.

The blog doesn’t reveal how the plight of Ryan and James was resolved, but it continues to live online and paints Kenya as a “commercial surrogacy nightmare”."

To be fair, those babies will probably fare better in Ireland with the father and his husband than who knows where in Kenya.

The Kenyan social services might not see it that way.
They already have a law against single people adopting babies/ children of the opposite sex, so a single man can't adopt a girl, thank goodness.
Homosexuality isn't legal so they won't be accepting of the father being in a gay relationship.
They'll consider the children as Kenyan. They currently don't have another nationality, especially as the Irish embassy isn't helping.
From watching the documentary 'Hard Labour' the mother's real name might not even be on the birth certificate.

If the father was wealthy, he would be able to sign a large cheque to make all the difficulties go away, but that isn't the case here.

To be fair, those babies will probably fare better in Ireland with the father and his husband than who knows where in Kenya. They are here now and need care and a home. This should never have been allowed to happen but it has and they need to have their needs met somehow.

Shocker..not.

I started a GF for a mobility scooter. Got no where.

The €30,000 had been raised.

The paper from the journalist up thread explains the complex legal situation in Kenya. From memory of the article, if he is the biological father of all three babies he will need a DNA test (more costs and waiting). He then claims custody of the babies in court. I assume the babies will then have dual nationality as the mother who gave birth to the babies will be the mother on the birth certificate. I don't think he can go the adoption route. This of course assummes that the authorities don't check the DNA of the mother which will complicate things as I assume donor eggs were used.
It is a complete mess and should be illegal for anyone to buy babies. People who buy these babies are buying consent from the mother, but it is coercive so not real consent.

horrendous.