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

[sashh]

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

Wow, so they just abandoned their dog to fend for itself as well. These people are going to be such marvellous parents.

I knew a lovely, lovely lady who fostered a child from birth. Child severely disabled.
Parent wouldn't relinquish even though they had no contact and no intention of taking child back. They played no part in the child's life at all. It wasn't a case of child being in respite.
Child died.
Birth parent took control of funeral and remains. Life long carer had no say, no status, nothing.

Heartbreaking.

I've just seen in the paper today that the surrogate is now asking for the twin daughter back.

What a fucking mess

This keeps getting worse by the sound of it. It's concerning that services don't seem to be able to locate them. It would be best for them to face the music and engage with services to determine what's to be done. I hope they do for the sake of their children. If they are feeling hunted it won't help them see that going to ground gives even more cause for concern.

Just out of interest why do the parents have to relinquish parental rights themselves? If the child has been removed and the parents are never allowed them back why can't the child be adopted?

If a child is removed and the courts decide that it is in the child's best interests to be freed for adoption they can make the order and the birth parents will lose PR.

This is in the UK. It doesn't happen in every country.
I don't know how it works in other countries.

Part of me pities whatever authority has to make decisions in this case. You would need the wisdom of Solomon. Whether to re-unite the twins, the citizenship issues and just trying to figure out what is right. I expect though no one authority will decide for both children ultimately as they are in two different jurisdictions. Has it been established if the girls status was regularised on arrival in Australia?

Itsbetter - if you read up on forced adoptions in Australia, it might give some insight into why they don't do it now.

It scares the heck out of me that they have disappeared. Who knows what a desperate person may do?

Yes, our history is different to UK history.

In order to avoid another 'stolen generation' we go too far the other way.

This whole situation is a fucking mess and I have no idea how it will be worked out.

Absolutely agree, Mary and Morloth. Fucking mess is right.

Midnite my thoughts too...perhaps the media could step back to give some breathing space. It can't be helpful to Social services there that the media focus has driven them to ground especially as they've been named. I'm not sure that's helpful to the baby girl's welfare.

This is all just horrific and I suspect there will be no happy outcome. It seems the options for them poor children are a life of poverty in Thailand, living with a sex offender or spending their life in foster care. It's a huge mess and those poor babies will suffer for it.

Depending on how the fundraising goes, Gammy at least won't be in poverty - there's a substantial fund there now, and as it's controlled by a charity I expect that they will sort out some method of continued payment over time so that he is well cared for. It won't be luxury living, but it shouldn't be poverty either.

Yep, it is a huge mess and it is clear that the Thai agency was also highly dodgy. Cannot imagine what the best solution would be for these two babies.

Honestly? I think as a rich country which has allowed this to happen we owe both children and the surrogate mother, morally if nothing else.

No idea, just no bloody idea what is 'best'.

I think what is obvious though is that the little girl should not be anywhere near a known fucking pedophile.

Possibly an 'amnesty' for all the babies/surrogates/biological parents who are currently gestating with no new cases being allowed. Or a whole bunch of surrogates are going to be lumped with babies they cannot afford and never intended to have and babies will be left in that situation.

The power imbalance here is breathtaking, I hope the Thai government really do start looking out for their citizens. A shame they need to be protected from 'us' but there you go.

Again I agree with you Morloth.
I think they have to, in humane terms, allow any current surrogacies to go ahead otherwise it would be ridiculous - as you say, Thai surrogates left with children who are not biologically theirs, whom they are unlikely to be able to afford, and who are at risk of prosecution.
I think the Thai govt has to decide in humane terms that this particular mother should either not be prosecuted, or, if prosecuted at least not given jail time - otherwise what would become of Gammy and his siblings then?

An amnesty is the most humane way forward, with an immediate brake on any other cases - if frozen embryos are involved, then there should possibly be some way these could be returned to the biological parents, but they should definitely not be implanted as of now (or in fact, as of a few days ago when this story broke)

I hope they find Gammy's sister and I hope that they remove her. If she is an Australian citizen now there is next to no chance that she will be returned to Thailand, sadly; but if the parents failed to register her properly then there might be a chance.

In all of this, the relevant govts have to keep in mind what is best for the children - and prosecuting the Thai surrogate mums isn't likely to be the best for any child, or other children risk being left without their mum.

The clinics/agents however - prosecute them til it hurts. They're the ones taking advantage of vulnerable people - desperate would-be parents at one end, and poor, needing money at all costs women at the other end. THEY are the ones who are guilty of human trafficking and they should be prosecuted as such.

Re the fostering to adoption thing, the information I had came from a number of foster agencies we were speaking to a few months ago. They said that changes in legislation now made it far easier for long-term foster children to be adopted. I would assume those laws might be state-based though? (we're NSW)
I know friends of our who have a long-term foster child (since he was a tiny baby) were able to adopt him and they have recently taken on another baby who they expect to be able to adopt before she turns 2.
There has been quite a bit in the paper about new laws to make adoption easier.
We haven't gone ahead with fostering, though, so to be honest I stopped paying much attention so I'm probably out of touch.

All right, found this:
What if the birth parents do not wish to consent?
The Supreme Court can make orders dispensing with the consent of the parents in certain circumstances.
These circumstances are when:
? the birth parent cannot be found or identified, or
? the birth parent is physically or mentally incapable of consenting, or
? the best interests of the child should override the wishes of the birth parent, or
? an application is made by carers of the child, when the child has established a stable relationship with the carers, and the adoption of the child by the carers will promote the child’s welfare.

That's taken from here - so it does appear as though the Supreme Court can overrule parents who don't consent; although said parents are still able to contest the adoption up to a point. But once the adoption order is made that is it for the birth parents.

The baby girl was never going to be sent back to Thailand. What I think might become a possibility is the baby boy being removed from his home if offered Australian citizenship, being transfered over there to be reunited with his sister, if they ever find her, if she is removed from her parents.

Some of the agent's "not exactly a smoking gun" gun comments have started to stick. The surrogate does appear to have been recruiting other surrogates as recently as June this year.

It doesn't really matter if the accusations are mainly

...vague hot air with a few tiny grains of truth, (using past surrogates as recruiters is an obvious business tactic, and doesn't exactly make her a king pin making million from the business. Possibly means she could be charged along with other agents if she doesn't play ball though.)

or

...the start of a swathe of very negative revelations that strongly contradict her original version of events and the current vision of her character/fittness as a parent...perhaps backed up by genuine evidence.

All that is needed is doubt that can be sensationalised and whipped up into public outcry. Which is easy enough. They built her up, they can knock her down. The higher up their pedastal is, the greater the crash when pushed off it, the stronger the backlash from the public.

Which would make arm twisting her into giving him up "so he can be with his sister" a cake walk. Becuase there are pleanty of opportunities to "motivate" her into giving governements and the public what they want. Up to and including dangling the risk of jail time and the removal of her other children.

They should send the girl back to her mother in Thailand to be with her brother. So sad.

There's definitely no "perfect" ending to this but both children could have a "happy enough" outcome, I guess - I don't know quite how for the baby girl, but they have to find her first!
For Gammy, I still think he should stay with his surrogate mum and her family, and I think for his sake she should be treated leniently but a close eye kept on her as well.

And, quite frankly, the press should back off now and let the appropriate authorities deal with it.