Robbie and Ayda Anyone else uncomfortable with surrogacy in these circumstances?

[Charlottesspider0]

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/metro.co.uk/2018/09/07/robbie-williams-and-ayda-field-announce-theyve-welcomed-a-daughter-by-surrogate-7922256/amp/

I don’t fully agree with surrogacy for many reasons. Impact on newborn being removed from the ‘carrier’, impact on potential surrogates health. Also, the fact that unless the surrogate is altruistic, even in the uk where there are restrictions on financial payments for surrogacy, it almost will still always involve a financially Richer person compensating a poorer woman.

However in the case of couples who can’t conceive themselves or via ivf, and same sex couples, I can see what leads people to seek surrogates.

However this article makes reference to the use of a surrogate because their work schedules are too busy.
They also have two healthy children.
I find it difficult to accept that they are willing use Another woman’s body to take the risks of childbirth, paticularly in their given circumstances.

I think you want a baby, before your 40th birthday as the article makes reference to, then do it yourself, take the risks yourself and sort out your own work schedule to suit. It’s not like they don’t have the money in the bank to do that.

And if after two healthy children, a third pregnancy doesn’t happen for you, be happy with what you have.

Robbies famous comment likening watching his wife give birth to his first child, to his favourite pub burning down, to me just makes renting another woman’s body even more distasteful.

I don't understand why frank & open discussions about surrogacy are labelled vile. Discussions have to be had otherwise progession won't be made

People spouting the vile remarks.
I am pro choice. Doesn’t mean I label all people pro life as ‘vile’.
I’m a grown up and I’m allowe an opinion on an ethical issue. So call me vile all you like. You are the small minded ones if you think people can’t have an opinion different to your own.

Pissedoffdotcom why did you take exception to my “icky” comment and then, in the same breath, say “I don’t agree with commercial surrogacy”. I was talking about commercial surrogacy!

I read an article that said they had been trying for a while and couldn't get pregnant

Sorry Haworthia i saw your comment highlighted by another poster in their comment & responded to that. Didn't specifically see your comment & respond. Altho i wanted to dispel the whole 'surrogates only do it for money' notion that still exists

Robbies famous comment likening watching his wife give birth to his first child, to his favourite pub burning down, to me just makes renting another woman’s body even more distasteful.. I'd forgotten he said that. What an arse.

I'd not like to think of that surrogate choosing them rather than a couple in genuine need. There must be a limited number of surrogates about.

Plus, what does it do to the child 'you're the one Mummy was too busy/couldn't be arsed to give birth to'.

Plus, what does it do to the child 'you're the one Mummy was too busy/couldn't be arsed to give birth to'.

It's comments like this that are vile. None of us know why they used a surrogate and I seriously wouldn't trust what a source told the Daily Star!

almost certainly have been screened to ensure she knew what she was getting into

This may be the case here because we are talking about rich celebrities, but that certainly isn't a requirement in UK law. There is no mandatory pre conception screening or counselling and this has led to some quite worrying cases even with supposed 'altruistic' surrogacy.

People are saying it's a horrible thread as you are judging a situation you know nothing about. By all means, discuss the ethics of commercial surrogacy but you have no clue whether that is what happened here so don't bring their names into it.

Just to add I have deep concerns about surrogacy but I can at least understand the argument for it with childless couples. But using a surrogate to have a 3rd child? I had to curtail the size of my family due to health complications that arise during pregnancy. The idea of visiting that risk onto another woman when I was already lucky enough to have children is sickening to me.

The situation has been put into the public eye by them. Obviously it will be discussed. Unfortunately that is what happens when you make your living from the general public

Sleeping there are specific circumstances in this example that impact on my opinion.
As I’ve said surrogacy for childless infertile couples, whilst there are ethical issues and I don’t fully agree, I can understand and perhaps might have even done the same myself facing infertility. It’s easy to say you don’t agree with something when you have a child of your own.

However, This couple, like the kardashians wanted their third child to make a perfect family. Different.

What i don't understand is why these standards are only ever applied to infertile couples. Why is it okay for somebody to naturally conceive however many children they feel will complete their family...but if somebody enlists the help of a willing surrogate it is somehow abhorrent to dare have a perfect number? If they were forcing women at gunpoint then fine, but they didn't. The surrogate will have entered into this agreement by choice, hell they probably found her through an agency that she signed up to prior to knowing these guys wanted a surrogate!

It would make me uncomfortable in any circumstance, I personally do not agree with surrogacy, I don't think women's bodies should ever be for sale or seen as a commodity and I don't think feelings come into it (for me at least).

You can’t simply call a commercial surrogate “willing” or “not forced” though, as if that removes any of the ethical question marks.

Would they have signed up if no money was exchanging hands? Do wealthy women sign up to be surrogates?

And then there’s the women living in Indian surrogacy clinics for the duration of their pregnancies. They’re willing too. They’re not forced at gunpoint. Does that mean they’re not being horribly exploited?
www.theguardian.com/global-development/2016/apr/01/outsourcing-pregnancy-india-surrogacy-clinics-julie-bindel

Because different standards should apply when you are using another human being's (let's be clear, woman's) body for your 'want'.

Haworthia its already been discussed about the different level of ethics in places like India. I detest the fact people go abroad to bypass UK rules. I believe surrogacy should only be legal between iPs & surrogates in the country they reside.

As for commercial surrogacy, again it is something personally i don't like. That said yes in the US women choose to do it commercially for various reasons. You cannot foe example be a surrogate if you receive any element of social security in many states - so that protects many of the financially vulnerable. And as awful as it sounds, a surrogate's reasons for doing it are her own. If (in the US) they choose to make a career out of it - which many do - then that is ultimately their own choice

You don't have to be 'force at gunpoint' for something to be unethical. There are a couple of surrogacy experiences that posters on MN have shared about apparently wholly altruistic surrogacy that was hailed as wonderful that scratching the surface I have found extremely unethical and worrying.

There are concerns that military wives in the US are becoming commercial surrogates in large numbers out of desperation and lack of other options- it is usually the wives of low paid men, who move around too much to be able to establish a career and they are in demand because they have health insurance so save the intended parents money. Not forced at gunpoint but by struggling to get by financially otherwise. I don't see how anybody could be comfortable with that.

There are always people who fall through the cracks as it were. In everything not just surrogacy. But if you were to meet surrogates who sign up with the agencies, or who find IPs through the groups, you would find women who want to help others have children. Reasons vary, but the desire to help is very real. There is always this bull about surrogates being poor, vulnerable weeds who need a mass of feminists to defend them. It simply isn't the case in the UK for the majority.

Outside the UK in poorer countries, absolutely. So direct attention there. Making surrogacy in the UK illegal won't solve the exploitation in other countries, it will potentially increase it. We need the rules tightening & monitoring, not abolishing. Obviously that is my view having been involved in surrogacy in the UK for several years.

TwistedStitch in most US states to sign up to a surrogacy agency - independent surrogates aren't as prevalent as in the UK from what i know - you have to have a psych evaluation & they do financial checks.

Donating eggs for women is an area that poorer women could be seen to be being exploited. There are, as far as i know from friends, no limitations to being able to do that aside from the obvious medical ones

As for exploitation in the UK - that is currently being looked at I believe through the ethics of egg sharing because it usually comes with reduced IVF costs for the donating couple.

Are you saying that agencies remove the potential for exploitation? The agencies are a money making business with ethical concerns of their own surrounding them- have you seen some of the contracts they have?

Interesting read on US surrogacy laws and the military wives issue.

www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2017/04/19109/

I refused to use an agency in the UK because i refuse to make IPs pay simply to sign up to them. That being said, agencies have a place in making sure that surrogates are stable; they require counselling for example which can only be a positive.

In an ideal world i would like to see agencies mandatory in the UK (UK focus atm as its where i live, bear with me). Within that, based on the fact nobody should be allowed to profit from surrogacy, agencies shouldn't be able to charge stupid fees nor should they be allowed to dictate expenses. IVF clinics should not be allowed to ramp up the costs for treatment when they know it is for a surrogate pregnancy.

Independent surrogacy leaves people open more than agency surrogacy. But people avoid agencies because of the way they run. As i said above, the rules need reiterating, tightening & monitoring. Abolishing surrogacy won't, imo, stop exploitation