Robbie and Ayda new baby. Another surrogacy discussion.

[EachandEveryone]

It fascinates me and thats not to upset everyday folk who are on the journey. They used the same surrogate that carried their little girl that must be just over one year? The poor womans hardly had chance to recover. I know she wasnt forced!

They already have a boy and girl. I dont understand celebs at all. I wonder if it was in the UK or USA? Anyway, Im sure the little one will be very loved thats the main.

www.standard.co.uk/showbiz/celebrity-news/robbie-williams-ayda-field-fourth-child-surrogate-instagram-a4362756.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1581708410

Five months to recover. Was it even that though if she had to go through IVF? It cant be healthy.

@ItWillBeBetterinAugust - again, I'm curious as to the rationale behind the view, I'm not arguing against you; but are you saying that women should not have autonomy over their own bodies? For example, a woman who has completed her own family, and then donates her eggs out of an altruistic desire to help an infertile couple - you think this shouldn't be allowed? And you believe the children will grow up to have psychological problems?

@EachandEveryone wow - is that all the gap was? I'm not sure how I feel about surrogacy but that doesn't sound healthy to me . . z

I don't think rich people should be able to hire poor people to carry babies for them any more than they should be able to buy kidneys from them.

I don't think babies should be for sale.

I'm not interested in any other aspect of these tedious people.

pelirocco123

As far as I am aware in every other circumstance we try to keep the mother baby dyad together because it is well established that it is beneficial.

The home the baby knew was a womb so hardly ripped from it
Plus the woman who gave birth was not the baby's biological mother
I am not completely defending this but if you are going to argue against it dont use emotive untruths

The home is the woman who grew that baby who nourished & built that baby with her body- her heartbeat, her voice, her smell is the home I was referring to, not her womb.

I don’t believe what I wrote is untrue

RedPandaFluff the drugs which stimulate the overiey to produce multiple eggs at once have massive side effects including infertility.

In America and some poorer Eastern European countries university students without children are recruited to have their overies over stimulated to produce 20+ eggs for sale to pay their student loans. They're not told about the massive potential side effects.

Women still die in childbirth in all western countries and more so in poorer countries. The risk of death in childbirth increases significantly after the fourth child. Mothers are also seriously injured and disabled by childbirth. Double incontinence is far commoner than people care to discuss. This impacts a woman's existing children. American surrogacy fees are significant but even 10k could persuade a UK mother of 4 on a very low income with no immediate employment prospects - it is not a free choice and impacts the woman's existing children, especially if she does or is left disabled.

Five months to recover
The babies births are 17 months apart.
. Is it even that though if she had to go through IVF? It cant be healthy
The surrogate does not go through the same process as IVF. Ayda will have had drug intervention like IVF to allow egg collection. The surrogate may have had some hormonal manipulation to get her cycle in line with Aydas.

*dies

A woman has the right to choose what happens to her body, including any foetus it contains

BUT, once a baby is born, that baby has rights ....
which should include not being given to people unless they have passed the standard Social Services screening for adoptive parents

Having enough money to buy a baby and bypass the SS checks does not mean a person or couple are fit to be parents

A baby is not a commodity that a woman should be allowed to sell

So surely the answer is regulation and safeguards to protect women and ensure they ARE making a free choice, and not taken advantage of, and they understand the risks involved, rather than strip women of the right to do these things? I feel that nobody should tell me what I can and can't do with my body, my organs, my cells; as long as I understand and accept the risks.

There are riskier ways to make money than donating eggs. And not all surrogates keep having baby after baby. Not all donors and surrogates do it for financial reward either.

Surely there's a middle ground here? Certain circumstances under which surrogacy and donated gametes is morally acceptable?

I’m not against surrogacy or ivf. I was fortunately to conceive naturally. I don’t know what path I’d have taken to have a child that was biologically mine if I hadn’t been lucky like that so I don’t think I could judge it like that. I believe for initial infertility these advances are important and should be used but highly regulated. Especially health if the surrogate. You hear of mothers/sisters giving birth for daughters/sisters. I could see lemme doing for my sister if she couldn’t conceive naturally or via ivf. This is different to a stranger being a paid surrogate.

However, what seems to be happening isn’t primary infertility is it? It’s rich woman and couples who already have a few children and for whatever reason can’t/don’t want to birth any more themselves so they pay someone else to. I can’t believe that is moral. They already have a child. You count your blessings. You don’t pay someone to grow and birth additional children for you. The other thing we see if older woman (45+ I guess) ys isn’t donated eggs or perhaps frozen eggs and surrogates to have children beyond their naturally fertile years. Don’t get me wrong if someone conceived naturally later good for them I couldn’t care less how old they are but there seems to be a trend in celebrities deciding to have children when really they aren’t able to do they effectively are buying them in my mind. Again it doesn’t seem moral.

I guess I’m on the fence as I do support in some circumstance but feel it’s very immoral in others.

Really surprised by this thread.

How do you know whose egg was used? Whose sperm? How willing or unwilling the surrogate was? Whether she was paid? Whether she was a loving relative of the family? Why Ayda didn’t go through the pregnancies?

So many assumptions here. It’s a bit crap to jump to conclusions when you don’t know these things.

I don't see the issue.

Adoption through the normal route isn't suitable or possible for everyone.

I don't think you can look at individual surrogates or individual couples, 7. A broader analysis bears out that there is a general power imbalance at play, and that surrogacy is not in the best interest of a baby.
A baby who is biologically 'yours', while perhaps desirable for some, is not a right. Surrogacy is a popular choice in my home country (where surrogacy is illegal), and comfortably off couples travel to the same city in a poorer Eastern European country to engage in surrogacy arrangements. Investigative journalism has unearthed heart breaking stories of behind the scenes coercion and strong-arming of the surrogates (who, for the feel good benefit of the 'couples', are selected from the 'women who have completed their families', and 'women who have employment / an education' categories).

@7salmonswimming they have stated the baby is genetically theirs so we do know whose egg and sperm were used. Since the child is theirs it can hardly be described as buying a baby and presumably nobody held a gun to the surrogate's head.

As for sure it is sex selection, *Haworthia no, 50/50 remember. Plenty of people have alternate genders naturally. And again, if they did select, so what. This child is clearly wanted and loved.

Plus the woman who gave birth was not the baby's biological mother

Yes she was. To the baby, the woman who gestated and gave birth to her is entirely her mother. The baby is the important person whose needs have been entirely forgotten in surrogacy and the baby doesn't know she doesn't share DNA with the mother who birthed her. Taking babies away from their mother at birth is cruel and harmful and should only be done where the mother would put that baby at risk.

Also - the woman who gestated and birthed the baby grew the baby from her own body. Even if it wasn't her egg she's still the birth mother. Thankfully the law also recognises her as such.

What are their reasons for hiring a surrogate? Are they medical, or is it about Ayda's figure?

As someone heartbroken through primary infertility I wouldn’t find it acceptable to use a surrogate in any circumstance, certainly not for a fourth child!

Maybe, just maybe it’s acceptable where the surrogate is a close friend or family member who offers, but otherwise it’s just renting a woman’s body and that’s not ok.

I really don’t get the ivf comparator. The only person whose health suffers when I go through ivf will be mine, I’m not putting another woman at risk for money.

Really don’t see a problem. Surrogate’s choice, her body not MN’s.For some women this is something they really like to do.

And as for the posted saying she doesn’t agree with IVF.

As long as the child is loved and cared for...who really cares how he came in to this world?!

@SirChing that you don’t agree with IVF, thankfully your opinion didn’t count when my kids were born

The last time I checked, we weren't all a hive mind and were allowed our own opinions about things. Has that now changed, and we are to be condemned if we don't all agree with everything that is available to us in life? Isn't that a tad judgemental?

I am SO sorry if it comes as a shock that not everyone shares exactly the same values, or believes that the same things are right. You, rightly went with your own beliefs and that's great, but I dont agree with IVF for personal reasons and would never have had it. Is that ok with you?

@Gr3yCl3y Not sure why you are raising your eyebrows. Do you normally struggle when other people have differing opinions to you? Or are you also someone who thinks we are a hive mind who all share the same values?

I really don’t get the ivf comparator. The only person whose health suffers when I go through ivf will be mine, I’m not putting another woman at risk for money

Exactly. Which is why the person who said that it was hypocritical to disagree with Surrogacy but not with IVF was, IMO, making a false comparison. The fact that some do and some don't agree with IVF is by the by, because it's an apples and oranges comparison.

The other woman is putting herself at risk by choosing to carry a baby and give birth as do most women on the planet.