To think it is wrong for a surrogate to have a child for two men?

[Extremelychocolatey]

The men in question are Elton John and David Furnish.

link

It feels wrong on so many levels.

Re the pubic head hair - maybe that was where it was transplanted from? :o

It is very clearly 'up to' that level of expense and pregnancy could quickly cost that much if things don't go to plan, I've known a surrogate need 4 months strict bedrest, a fair bit of that in hospital - she had 3 children of her own and had to take time off work...

Disabilities and health problems during and after the pregnancy are always discussed at length prior to pregnancy when working with a support organisation (Surrogacy UK, COTS etc) and hopefully this is also the case outside of the organisations.

No you don't have the right to say who can and who cannot have children.
That way lies Nazism.

We can already select certain characteristics in children through IVF.

Just because we dont approve of someone elses life style/sexuality does not give us the right to deny them children.
Unless of course they are proven abusers.

diddl it's hard to know what is and isn't 'intervention' once you move away from penetrative sex for the purpose of procreation. Like Lenin our DD was conceived 'naturally', by which I (I think like Lenin, though she will correct me I hope if I've misconstrued her comment) mean without drugs, without a doctor, without a fertility clinic, but with careful timing and monitoring of a natural cycle. The 'intervention' in our case can be bought in any chemist's shop...

I think (again, like Lenin) that they could have considered other options, especially as it seems as if DF is the keen one (EJ interestingly says he now wants to adopt Z, but doesn't know the process - surely he has very able lawyers at hand - in the UK - again, Lenin, I need your expertise - I think he'd automatically have parental responsibility). I suspect that a degree of involvement on the part of the donor in this case would have proved very difficult because of the celebrity of the parents (cf. Michael Jackson) involved - and it's very difficult to transact these emotionally complex relationships in the absence of a clear legal framework at the best of times. I speak as someone who has had a good experience - so far.

The comment about "now wanting to adopt" referred to the Ukrainian boy I think. Interesting that then he thought he was too old and had too many commitments.....

Two people who very much wanted a child have had one
They sound over the moon and very happy .
Enough said !

Ps John Travolta (56) and Kelly Preston (48!) had a baby recently - havent heard a peep from any detractors - re age etc ?

Personally I think its lovely that two people love each other a great deal and wishes to sharre that love in having a child together.

That its a suragate woman whom has the baby for them to me doesnt change that. I think that baby will be very loved and well looked after. I dont feel either of them are too old to give a child a good safe life.

My friend is expecting her 4th in January,she is 45 and her DP is 59,it will be his 1st.
One or two 'friends' have expressed an opinion,i think it's lovely.

SantaMouse - if they weren't famous, we wouldn't have heard about it and I wouldn't have an opinion. Their ages might still concern me. And that this child will probably be an only (no offence to onlies or those having just the one, but I have friends who hated being the only child).

Look, I don't know them, so I don't know their real motives. If it wasn't for Madonna and Brangelina I probably wouldn't care.

I find this sickening actually (and I am entitled to my opinion) and extremely selfish.

WTF is the world coming to when people can say that a child does not necessarily need a mother! We are biologically wired for this are we not?

A child has a RIGHT to a MOTHER AND A FATHER. Whether they are good or bad is down to luck unfortunately. To deliberately create a child knowing they would grow up without a mother (or father) is selfish in the extreme by the 'parents', surrogate and egg donor in my view.

MumsMunchkin, a child has a right to good parents - male or female!

IFAIK the legality of surrogacy in the UK is a difficult area because surrogacy agreeements are not enforceable in uk courts, as a result there is a risk that:

a) the surrogate mother will change her mind at the last minute (ie once the baby is born) and say she wants to keep it

OR

b) the "adoptive" parents will change their minds and decide they don't actually want the baby.

For this reason if the "adoptive" parents want the surrogate to terminate and she doesn't then they can't force her, but in all likelihood she'll not get her expenses and will keep the baby.

If the baby is born with disabilities which are apparent at birth but didn't show up on a scan then presumably the adoptive parents can still walk away.

That is true MumNWLondon, and statistically it is more likely that Intended Parents will change their minds about accepting the baby than the surrogate changing her mind about giving him or her back* to his or her parents.

*as a surrogate I do see it as giving the baby back to his or her parents, they have never been mine to give to them.

I have some reservations about surrogacy. On the whole I think it is a fantastic thing to do for someone else, and I don't really have any issues about money exchanging hands, but there is also the very real potential for exploitation (I find the idea of going to a third world country for a surrogate both abhorrent and also very counter-intuitive, because the mothers health is surely paramount in order to have a healthy baby, so the baby on the cheap is to me both unethical and stupid).

In this particular case my only reservations would be age (just not ideal) and 'celebrityness' just because I think that it must be a very odd world to grow up in and so many relationships break up and children go off the rails. I had more personal issues with MAdonna's adoption route.

Oh and the legal and ethical issues if something goes wrong are I suspect incredibly complicated. I don't think that this child will feel themselves given away though, unless his relationship with his parents goes terribly wrong. He will know he was very much wanted and planned for after all.

MumsMunchkin, what century do you live in?

I don't agree with mumsmunchkin but she is entitled to her opinion

The most important thing is for a child to have a loving parent. Two loving parents is better (in my hunble opinion) but the most important thing is a loving parent.

I do think that parental figures of both sexes is good (so if a gay couple have a child, to ensure a parental figure of the opposite sex to them is in the child's life is a good thing) and there is nothing wrong with saying this. I think children need a 'same sex' figure in their life but the most important thing is to have loving parents

but Elton and John are too old - why didn't they do this before? Why not adopt children who really need their help or dedicate some time to children in orphanages?