Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think if you pay for a surrogate baby that you decide you don't want you should pay for the op he needs.

563 replies

sashh · 02/08/2014 07:14

An Australian couple have paid a Thai woman to be a surrogate, she had twins but one has Down Syndrome so they left him behind and took his sister home.

He has a hole in the heart (news reporting that it is in addition to DS, actually it is more likely part of the DS) and his mum can't afford his op.

Surely the least you can do is pay for his bloomin' op?

Obviously there should have been an agreement with who pays for what under what circumstances but in reality is a poor person in a developing country going to think about that?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-28617912

www.abc.net.au/news/2014-08-01/mother-of-thai-baby-abandoned-by-surrogate-parents-struggles-to/5642478

OP posts:
KoalaDownUnder · 03/08/2014 11:49

Why can't Australians just for life foster then? Why does one need to adopt?

Because there is no such thing. If you foster a child, you are always at risk of them being returned to the biological parents.

Also if you are gonna get children from abroad then why not adopt children from poorer countries rather than surrogacy?

Adopting children from poorer countries is also extremely difficult. The red tape involved is massive, as there are complex international laws and treaties involved. The Australian govt cracked down on international adoption years ago, because of international human rights issues like baby-selling and child smuggling.

It's bloody difficult to adopt a child, either domestically or internationally. I'm not sure if some people understand how difficult.

KoalaDownUnder · 03/08/2014 11:56

I suspect that the answer to the question you posed is that, whether we like it or not, people might want to have a child that is genetically theirs, rather than adopting or fostering an unrelated child.

Some people, sure. But this is much less of a factor than you would think.

Most people turn to surrogacy because they've just got no chance adopting any child, from anywhere. I know lots of stories of people who are financially stable and in a good marriage, and who wait years and spend tens of thousands trying to adopt from overseas. And get nowhere.

There were only 129 children adopted from overseas into Australia in 2012-2013.

ICanSeeTheSun · 03/08/2014 12:07

I now see that gammy mother is the Thai lady. I don't see why she should lose him after they both have bonded.

Do anybody who is suggesting adoption or fostering this baby in another country actual stop and think that the best thing for this baby is to stay in Thailand with his mother

microcosmia · 03/08/2014 12:08

On a separate point although I can't condone their decision in respect of their DS baby I also wonder at people saying they are not fit parents for their little girl. We don't know that. Their decision might be unpalatable to us but does that mean that they aren't caring for her properly? I agree they could be storing up problems for the future if one day she finds out that they rejected her twin for his disability, off course this does not give the impression that they were loving or compassionate about him. People make odd decisions that are hard to understand for sure but does it make them bad parents in respect of her? I hope Australian social services will follow up to assess that, they are the only ones in a position to judge that.

I know someone who rejected their Downs baby 20 years ago. They wanted to walk away. This was their 3rd child and money was not the issue. They didn't bond or want to see the baby. They were offered support to help them cope and resisted this support initially. In the end extended family brought pressure to bear on them by telling them they had to accept the child and do their best. They reluctantly took the child home. Over time they did take responsibility and provide for the child. But it was because they were duty bound rather than wanting to, and there was an underlying resentment about that for a long time. Not everyone has the resources to cope.

microcosmia · 03/08/2014 12:08

On a separate point although I can't condone their decision in respect of their DS baby I also wonder at people saying they are not fit parents for their little girl. We don't know that. Their decision might be unpalatable to us but does that mean that they aren't caring for her properly? I agree they could be storing up problems for the future if one day she finds out that they rejected her twin for his disability, off course this does not give the impression that they were loving or compassionate about him. People make odd decisions that are hard to understand for sure but does it make them bad parents in respect of her? I hope Australian social services will follow up to assess that, they are the only ones in a position to judge that.

I know someone who rejected their Downs baby 20 years ago. They wanted to walk away. This was their 3rd child and money was not the issue. They didn't bond or want to see the baby. They were offered support to help them cope and resisted this support initially. In the end extended family brought pressure to bear on them by telling them they had to accept the child and do their best. They reluctantly took the child home. Over time they did take responsibility and provide for the child. But it was because they were duty bound rather than wanting to, and there was an underlying resentment about that for a long time. Not everyone has the resources to cope.

drspouse · 03/08/2014 14:43

Icanseethesun
If you read my previous post there are many reasons why living in Thailand may not be the best thing for this boy:
Lack of medical care
Lack of appropriate education
Racism against a mixed race child (and his mother).
He'll also have no opportunity to grow up knowing his twin. If he was in long term foster care near his genetic family (and if they saw sense and realised it was in both their interests) he'd have that chance.
If this type of abortion is illegal full stop in Thailand they'd have been in the same situation with a singleton, so it seems crazy they'd choose Thailand anyway.

Jenny70 · 03/08/2014 15:20

News tonight says they are not certain the couple even knew about the DS baby - the agents can be corrupt, and not wanting to risk the healthy pregnancy they may have told the couple the DS was terminated/dead, and only passed over the other twin.... one possibility I guess, but just awful for this beautiful baby to be left with a poor mother and no healthcare. Someone has done him wrong, but wonder who?

FeministStar · 03/08/2014 15:37

Jenny70 if they didn't already know then I expect they know now - there can't have been many Australian couples who brought home a baby girl from Thailand as a result of a surrogacy arrangement. They will know when Gammy was born and have probably put two and two together :(
If they didn't know and have found out like this then they deserve sympathy and not condemnation.

microcosmia · 03/08/2014 15:46

Oh jenny that could mean an entirely different scenario. I wouldn't have thought it old be possible for them not to know about the baby, since they requested he be aborted. But if they didn't know he hadn't been and that he needs care I wonder how they must be feeling.
Like zfeminidtstar I hope they didn't just find out noe through the media....that would be cruel.

Maryz · 03/08/2014 16:01

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Maryz · 03/08/2014 16:04

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

KoalaDownUnder · 03/08/2014 16:14

I'm sure the clinic could have procured an abortion for the surrogate, yes. But the point is that she didn't want to have one, for her own religious reasons.

If the couple (via the agency) put her under any pressure at all to have an abortion, I think that's morally reprehensible. Regardless of any prior agreements, nobody should ever pressure a woman to terminate a foetus she is carrying.

Maryz · 03/08/2014 16:18

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

microcosmia · 03/08/2014 16:21

But no report before this indicated anything other than that they rejected the child did it? The impression created is clearly that they knew and refused to take him, which is what people have based their responses on. I've seen no report yet to say otherwise but if there is another side to this it needs to be aired to give a full picture rather than a distorted one. I don't agree that they should be identified though, they have another child to protect. It raises the possibility however unlikely of a tug of love scenario if they decide they want him after this.
Whatever the truth behind it it's a sad situation for the poor little mite,he's adorable.

Maryz · 03/08/2014 16:25

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

bopoityboo3 · 03/08/2014 16:39

this story made me so angry and sad when I heard it on the radio. but the surrogate mum sounds lovely and was saying that he is now part of her family.
I also feel sorry for the twin who was taken by the bio parents. If they can be that shallow about their own flesh and blood and just abandon their child because he's not 'perfect' what sort of life and standards are they going to expect her to live up to?

microcosmia · 03/08/2014 16:40

I'm actually hoping you're right Maryz, I'd rather think they didn't know up to this rather than that they knowingly rejected him. Both accounts can't be true at any rate.

WatchingSeaMonkeys · 03/08/2014 16:46

If they can be that shallow about their own flesh and blood and just abandon their child because he's not 'perfect' what sort of life and standards are they going to expect her to live up to

But if he was their own "flesh and blood" he would have been aborted in the womb - not abandoned. They made their wishes clear.

The mother decided that she couldn't do that and wanted to keep him. That's her choice & she is the one that will have to live with it.

bopoityboo3 · 03/08/2014 16:54

not read the whole thread yet but watchingseamonkeys from the news report I heard I was lead to believe that they had abandoned him there was no mention of them asking the women to terminate him.

ICanSeeTheSun · 03/08/2014 17:20

drspouse but if it wasn't for the fact surrounding the conception would you have said that if this lady conceived the child naturally

microcosmia · 03/08/2014 17:20

My DS who has SN himself asked an interesting question I wasn't sure how to answer, namely if a couple are having a baby with a surrogate and something bad happens to them both, like they die in an accident, then who is responsible for the baby if the surrogate never intended to keep it? Is it the authorities and which ones , where the child is born or where the parents are from?

Maryz · 03/08/2014 17:32

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Mammuzza · 03/08/2014 18:23

I'm a bit on the fence about all the people saying abortion is illegal in Thailand - I bet a clinic that can perform illegal IVF and surrogacy arrangements wouldn't be beyond performing the odd illegal abortion

Illegal abortion is accessable. But... quality and standards are on a sliding scale of cost.

So an agency with an eye on the bottom line might not have been offering a termination with top notch patient care. Back in my day even in the mid-price range the rooms were dingy and dirty with women who had already had children were routinely denied anestetic or pain relief for the proceedure.

You can leave with your uterus intact. But seriously traumatised by the experience nonetheless.

If she had ever known/heard about anybody who had had one, I can immagine even without strong religious feelings against she might have been inclined to dig her heels in and declare that was a damn sight more personal risk than she had signed up for.

drspouse · 03/08/2014 18:27

Icanseethesun If the child was conceived through intercourse between a Thai woman and an Australian man, unless the father was living in Thailand and supporting the baby and seeing him, then yes, the baby might well be better off at least part of the time in Australia, for all the reasons I've suggested.
He would have access to his biological family
He would have less prejudice than if the only mixed race child in the community
He would have more access to medical and educational opportunities.

In his case all his genetic family - including his full twin - are in Australia. He has no genetic relatives in Thailand as far as we know.