Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

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:
microcosmia · 04/08/2014 14:46

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

momnipotent · 04/08/2014 14:50

Totally agree with Maryz.

One other thing from the article that I quoted above, the parents described the surrogacy experience as "traumatising".

I suspect they are just as much victims as the surrogate is.

Thumbwitch · 04/08/2014 15:02

Some care worker now wants the baby brought to Australia so he can receive better medical care. Nice idea, but what about the family he has in Thailand? The ones who look after him and love him as their own?
I think he should stay with them. The money is being collected by a charity - I doubt they'll be handing it over in a lump sum to the child's mother so she can do what she likes with it.

And re. the suing - she was saying she wanted to sue the agency for non-payment of fees; perhaps the agency have suggested she'd do better suing the Australian couple instead, as she'd get more money that way? Who knows.

Mammamuzza - you quoted me - that wasn't my first response on this thread, it was in response to the latest report that the "father" had seen both babies but refused to acknowledge the baby boy at all and only done anything for the girl, not to the whole situation. Obviously I don't expect that you would have namechecked me throughout the thread! But I wasn't being as naive as your response seemed to indicate.

microcosmia · 04/08/2014 15:12

Worrying reports on twitter right now I'm not repeating here as not sure if they've been verified.
No doubt more to come.

Mammuzza · 04/08/2014 15:19

Thumbwitch

Genuine sorry!

I just saw the one line post (I didn't see it in the context of your other posts, it just jumped out at me). I do understand why that might have been somebody's initial reaction towards the inteded parents, given the sort of reporting in the press so far, and that's how I read it and responded to it.

Mammuzza · 04/08/2014 15:20

Worrying reports on twitter right now I'm not repeating here as not sure if they've been verified.

Blimey.

That sound ominous.

Thumbwitch · 04/08/2014 15:20

No worries! :)

Thumbwitch · 04/08/2014 15:21

Isn't twitter just a hotbed of gossip and chinese whispers though?

microcosmia · 04/08/2014 15:23

Mammuzza yes it does I'm not trying to be evasive but being cautious. It concerns the man alleged to be the dad in this case.

microcosmia · 04/08/2014 15:25

Thumbwitch it based on a report from channel 9 in Australia though

Thumbwitch · 04/08/2014 15:27

The one you linked to?

microcosmia · 04/08/2014 15:34

Channel 9 is quoted on that link Thumbwitch, if you look up the piece about the parents denying parentage another story pops up alongside

microcosmia · 04/08/2014 15:34

Channel 9 is quoted on that link Thumbwitch, if you look up the piece about the parents denying parentage another story pops up alongside

Thumbwitch · 04/08/2014 15:39

I looked at the link - the first story that came up wasn't about them denying parentage, it was about the thing that we're being evasive about, I think!

microcosmia · 04/08/2014 15:41

Just to say I know nothing about channel 9 or how reliable their claims are so caution advised for now. Don't want to directly quote or get MN into hot water.

Ultimately it doesn't alter the dilemma re the situation with the little boy though. Don't know what it might mean for the little girl, if anything.

microcosmia · 04/08/2014 15:42

OK Thumb witch it was the parentage story when I posted first. Then I got the link wrong went back to check and saw this. It's an evolving story obviously.

Maryz · 04/08/2014 15:45

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Thumbwitch · 04/08/2014 15:48

Very worrying if it's true - more so for the child they took with them than the one they left behind though.

That's ok, micro - it wasn't any form of criticism on my part, I was going to post a smiley to show that I was being friendly but it just seemed completely inappropriate given the subject matter!

Mammuzza · 04/08/2014 15:51

Dear god. Not even sure what to say about that development.

Except if individual nations needed any more encouragement to tighten up on international commercial surrogacy, this is certainly the story to provide it.

Mammuzza · 04/08/2014 15:53

Maryz

Ah... is it not libel then if you don't actually say a name, meaning they can print what they like ?

Maryz · 04/08/2014 15:54

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Chiana · 04/08/2014 16:03

Regardless of the ins and outs of this particular case, it just confirms my existing impression that commercial surrogacy is extremely dodgy. Especially when there's a language barrier and a gross financial discrepancy between the parents and the surrogate mother. I remember reading about a case where an Australian couple used an Indian surrogate and ran into difficulties. The woman had signed the surrogacy contract with a thumbprint, as she was illiterate.

I have no problem with altruistic surrogacy for a close friend or a family member, but commercial surrogacy seems very very iffy to me.

Mammuzza · 04/08/2014 16:06

Maryz

I think you're probably right. Which is a bit crap. Cos it means the press can print any old bollocks they like as clickbait should they feel so inclined.

I guess it's a case of seeing if that angle devlops or fades away like it wasn't even mentioned.

wannaBe · 04/08/2014 16:22

so, the father is allegedly a convicted paedophile? Just goes to show why these kinds of arrangements are dodgy at best because there is no regulation or ability to check who is buying a baby from who....

I read online that the surrogate's oldest child is seven. She herself is just 21, so would have had her first baby at just fourteen. Clearly vulnerable in many ways... whatever people think of how she is behaving now, she has clearly not had an easy life. I don't imagine having a baby at fourteen is much fun for someone living in the third world where access to decent help is limited at best....

KoalaDownUnder · 04/08/2014 16:23

You know, I'm just not finding the Australian parents' side of the story very convincing.

I know that the agencies can be very corrupt. But then again, these 50-year-old people (well, the man is 50) have paid a 21-year-old woman, who is already struggling to support her own two children in a comparatively poor country, to bear their child. They've done this in a country where they know (or should) that there's a lot of dodgy practices surrounding surrogacy. They've then not made the effort to personally meet the surrogate throughout, or after, the entire pregnancy.

And that's the best-case scenario, which is only true if the parents are telling the truth.

I'm sure that more allegations and counter-allegations will come to light, and we may never know the full truth. But my gut instinct is that the Aus parents were more than willing to turn a blind eye to what didn't suit them.