To think that going abroad for surrogacy should be far more controlled

[ReallyTired]

This couple are planning to bring back FOUR babies from India.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24670212

No one in the right mind diliberately choose to have quads. I feel that the family have not thought through the logistics of bringing up four babies. I feel shocked at the utter contempt the wife has for her two surrogate.

There are laws to prevent unsuitable people adopting from abroad and I feel that there should be laws to prevent unsuitable people using surrogates to get hold of a baby/babies.

Whoever mentioned epigenetics was correct, my son is classed as short stature not because of a genetics (either a condition like dwarfism or very low parental heights) but because of epigenetics, the environment in the womb programed his body to operate in starvation mode and limit growth.

That is not an argument against surrogacy but it is an argument against not giving a crap about your surrogates wellbeing, because her well being could permanently affect your child's health.

I would like to see couples limited to one surrogate and one embryo at a time, twins may be a more economical way of having children via surrogate for them (BOGOF!) but it puts the surrogate and babies at higher risk and is therefore unethical.

Of course if women chose to have two of their own embryos put in and take that risk with their own bodies that is there prerogative, but don't ask someone to take that risk for you.

I agree with that, Velo.

Two embryos is increasingly discouraged in this country:

www.oneatatime.org.uk

If you or your clinician considers that you are at risk of multiple pregnancy, you should discuss transferring only 1 embryo (single embryo transfer, known as SET).

The latest research shows that, if you are young, healthy and have a good chance of conceiving with IVF, transferring only one embryo does not significantly reduce the chance of pregnancy.

Since the surrogates are chosen because they are likely to have embryos successfully implant, they risks of multiple pregnancy are greater than for women with fertility problems.

When it comes to evidence-based decisions around risk we should be consistent, regardless of that woman's nationality.

I think Grennie's post at 00:11 is a very practical way as to how to we can regulate this.

UKBA do have some guidelines, but they are not hugely in depth:

www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/policyandlaw/guidance/ecg/set/set7/set7-24/

I haven't had chance to read this in full, but it's an depth article as to how international guidelines for surrogacy could be created:

georgetownlawjournal.org/files/2012/08/14Mortazavi.pdf

Oh yuck. That couple sound fucking horrible. Poor babies.

I feel that the couple should have a home study from a UK social worker before they are allowed to bring the babies home. If the parents are deemed unsuitable then I would like to see the babies adopted in the UK rather than rot in an Indian orphanage.

Unless you plan on doing this for everyone that is having a child, through any form of conception, then it's not appropriate. I had to have a police clearance before being allowed to access donor semen, despite all the people with criminal records out there reproducing however they wanted. Discriminating against people on the basis of their lack of ability to conceive naturally is abhorrent.

midnite you say I had to have a police clearance before being allowed to access donor semen#

That is not right either

However Stopdoingthat no one was talking about adopted children

The way I see it, the Indian baby factories are exploiting women and that is not on

I agree with what bogeyface said
using women as a service doesn't sit right with me not on this scale I watched a documentary about the Dr in India who does these surrogates and it was fascinating how it all worked but I am still not sure having a poor woman as an incubator is the way to go, 4 babies to order isn't right

oh so has mine what is that about it is at the side of my page

Perhaps if we had better systems in place in the UK to support surrogacy and adoption, people suffering with infertility wouldn't feel the need to go to places like India to create themselves a family.

Surrogacy and adoption following unwanted pregnancy is virtually unheard of in this country. I know it happens, but it's still fairly rare, and as long as our country makes things as difficult as possible for infertile couples to have a baby, this will continue.

I'd like our whole attitude towards surrogacy and adoption to be changed, I think it would benefit infertile couples, and pregnant women who can't support a baby. But at the moment there is such a stigma surrounding giving a baby up for adoption, people would rather abort or bring a baby into difficult circumstances than be seen to give their baby away.

candle you do have to fill out forms of questions regarding criminal background and social services interaction and so on before accessing fertility services in this country. I know, I've just done it for the 4th time (at each clinic as I have moved through the system). It's a test the infertile must pass that is never put to the fertile. I can see why it's there, but it's pretty offensive.

"Perhaps if we had better systems in place in the UK to support surrogacy and adoption, people suffering with infertility wouldn't feel the need to go to places like India to create themselves a family. "

In the UK we rightly outlaw payment for surrogacy as we recognise it is an easy way for well off women to exploit poorer women. And adoptions are about the best interest of the child, not about those who want to adopt a child. And that is right.

It is obvious that the Government can not control who has babies naturally without being incredibly authoritarian. So the Government accepts anyone can have a baby naturally, but if you are an unfit parent, then it can take your child into care. With artificial help, the Government can start putting controls in place.

It is not controlling what Indian women can do. It is controlling what British Citizens do. If someone wants to bring a child into the UK born through surrogacy, we can make rules about that. And nobody in their right mind is going to pay a woman to be a surrogate, without making sure they follow the rules so they can bring them home.

Sorry, but they did effectively choose it when they opted to transfer three embryos, more or less simultaneously, into two fertile women. There's such a high risk of multiples that they had to be prepared for twins at the very least.

It might have been advisable to at least wait a month or so between transfers to see if the first lot stuck.

So because infertile couples are desperate, we do nothing to stop them exploiting poor women abroad?

we do nothing to stop them exploiting poor women abroad?

isn't that what we all do when we buy clothes made in e.g. Bangladesh? Fish caught off Africa that deprive local fishermen of a livelihood?

walk into any UK supermarket or down a high street & there are the fruits of exploitation. and they are there because we buy them.

The second part of my post might arguably be what one elects to do in desperation; the first part looks more like actions borne of a sense of entitlement, IMO.

The brunt of the real risk falls on the surrogates, not least because the power in this arrangement is with the wealthy people from the developed country.

And no, you can't legislate a perfect world into existence - that's where empathy and personal ethics comes in.

I'm with bogeyface on this. I understand there is desperation and huge upset at not being able to conceive, but this just leaves an awful taste in my mouth. These women are being exploited, and while you can say what you want about them knowing what they are getting into, it's hardly a free choice when it comes to being able to afford to feed your own children. There is another BBC article here. These women are kept in dorms, not allowed to have sex with their partners, kept away from their own children. Their meals and vitamins are delivered to them, and 'encouraged to rest' sounds a lot like confinement to me. Yes, some places are training the women and giving them skills for future employment, and I suppose that is a good thing, but over all, it sounds like a cattle farm. What happens to the women who are permanently disabled or injured during pregnancy or birth? What happens if the baby is disabled, or dies?

Those prospective parents sound like the worst possible extreme of consumer culture. And horrible and callous too.