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

I am fucking disgusted by this and I feel sick.

Every time it comes on the radio me and DH are

I don't need flowers Darkest! I have Lucy!

And she is the most gorgeous flower you could have, Saggy. :)

Hell Yeah!

Saggy she sounds beautiful. My ovaries did a little flip at the way you talked about her. And im someone who decided not to have children a long while ago.

I look at the healthy, handsome and bright DS son of my friend and I just cannot get my head around this. Do they really think that the child they kept is not o going to hand them the 'sum total' of their behaviour when she grows up and discovers the truth? Do they think that they will get away without having to answer to her?

I so hope Australian SS steps in and takes this child away from them. I don't care what their justification is- to separate twins at birth is disgusting.

70isaLimitNotaTarget

Why do you keep ignoring the fact that the surrogate mother would not be able to get a legal abortion in Thailand.

I absolutely believe it is her right to choose, but when the choice is an illegal and quite possible dangerous procedure - does a back street abortionist have the means to abort one and not the other? I know it can be done in hospitals and sometimes is done with multiple births to give the remaining babies more chance of life but not outside a hospital surely?

They morally, if not legally, should be caring for that child either by themselves or financially or as others have said by handing him over to the Aus equivalent of social services. They are the reason he exists.

SaggyAndLucy
Please give your dd an extra hug today. I used to work in cardiology so have met my fair share of children with ds.

FyreFly
In a way I hope you are right.

Even if they felt they couldn't care for a child with ds themselves seeing as he's biologically their child and entitled to live in Australia you'd have thought they'd have taken him and then had him put into care their. Where he'd have got better medical care.

I think it is a terribly sad situation. Possibly for all involved.

I am trying to reserve judgment since we don't know the parents' side, we don't know what they were told. They may have been told that the abortion had been carried out or that the boy didn't survive to birth. They may not have known anything about this until a couple of days ago and since it happened a while ago, they may still only suspect that they are involved and may not know for sure, but can't risk losing the child they have by asking someone.

And they may be complete assholes.

I hope the little boy is provided with whatever services and surgeries he needs, and if the surrogate mum wants to keep him I hope that she has lots of support to do that.

I would expect a surrogacy contract would have specific provisions to cover situations like this. When I first heard about this I was shocked, but then I thought about it some more and this might be an unpopular opinion but here goes...

If a woman is pregnant and discovers that the baby has Downs Syndrome, well then if she chooses to terminate I would not judge her, that is a very personal and difficult decision to make. In this case the baby is being carried by a surrogate, so it would be another person who had to undergo a termination. This makes the donor parents seem heartless, but the analysis is the same. It would have been a difficult decision to make for them too, perhaps more difficult knowing they were asking another woman to have a termination. I'm assuming that this would have been covered in the surrogacy contract and if the surrogate refused to have a termination, which of course as a human I believe she has that right, however she was probably in violation of the surrogacy agreement.

Honestly I feel for everyone in this sad situation, this really does highlight the ethical issues surrounding surrogacy and particularly cheap foreign surrogacy agencies. I feel for the surrogate mother also, although as much as she is a victim in some ways, she did sign up to be a surrogate and ultimately violated her agreement (again, that's an assumption on my part). It's very likely the surrogacy agency didn't explain what she was signing up for clearly to her. Now there's a poor baby left to be cared for. I did read this morning that there have been many offers to adopt him but the surrogate mother wants to keep him.

People do this all the time

I fostered for 7 years and the first case I ever got was a twin who had Down syndrome and the mother could not or would nope cope with the child was ill.

I am not saying this is correct but I did read the couple did say before hand they could not cope with a disabled child I wonder why it's awful they they say this but it's fine for any other mother to abort a child with Down syndrome under the guise she wouldn't be able to cope

Rainbunny the agency providing this service is likely illegal and operating outside of any regulations - paying for surrogacy is illegal in Thailand. As a result I doubt there was any form of contract.

Like I said, it could be the parents are heartless bastards, it could be that they were completely unaware the child was still in existence and now find themselves in the middle of a shitstorm where everyone is condemning them as unfit and disgusting. No-one really comes out of this on top. The whole thing's a sorry mess.

The thing is, the DS is just a small part of the issue. Whatever the issues, he needs life saving medical treatment . they abandoned him somewhere where he would not receive it. It's tantamount to a death sentence.

I think like ANY couple who finds out their child will be born with Down's syndrome, they should have been given te choice

However morally once that child was brought into the world I don't know how they could just abandon him.

Thefishewife the point here is that surrogacy IS different because, in effect, the couple must accept the fact that the child is in someone else's body and they do not have the bodily autonomy they would have with a "normal" pregnancy. Therefore they are basically signing up (potentially) for whatever comes out at the end - because they cannot force someone else to have an abortion.

The exact same situation as if a man wants his pregnant partner to have an abortion but she doesn't want one. He can't force her and will be at least financially responsible for the child who is born - it's his whether he wants it or not.

In a surrogacy situation both the partners are thrust into the usual male role. They have no control, and must be responsible for whatever child is born, with whatever disabilities.

Them's the breaks. If you don't like it, don't sign up for surrogacy.

plinth eloquently put.

Morphine but it's not a couple's decision is it?

I recall when waiting for my amniocentesis results that come what may I would continue with my pregnancy. I discussed this with my husband but he was clear it was my decision alone and he would support me in whatever I decided.

Sorry but when deciding to do surragacey their are risks on both side .

The risk on the couple that the woman wants to keep the baby and the risk to the birth mother the couple could walk away at any point during the pregnancy and you will be left with the baby.

When this goose wrong it goes very wrong

Plith my ex didn't want me to have my son he wanted me to get rid I didn't he fucked off sad for my son but I have to accept it's something he didn't want

Not quite right plinth, the surrogate mother carries all the responsibilities, the child is legally only hers (in the UK anyway) until she registers the birth with the intended father on the birth cert thus giving him parental responsibility (shared with her still until the PO is granted )

The child is still normally handed to the IP's at birth though, some hospitals allow you to register births there don't they?

I just not sure what people want the couple clearly told the surrogate they could note cope with a disabled child she went ahead any way

I know bet plenty who are bleating on here would opt not to carry on with a pregnancy of a downs child and I personally know lots of parents who have had a disabled child and chosen to put them in care because they could not cope

QOD is there anything which would prevent a genetic father applying for parental responsibility off his own bat ? I accept he might not get sole responsibility or might be refused but is he otherwise in any different position from unmarried father who isn't named on birth certificate.

Such a horrible situation.

I think the ultimate answer is that comissioning parents should be required to take out some form of indemnity insurance before the surrogate becomes pregnant to ensure that if the parties disagree about a termination that the surrogate mother and the child are financially protected.

I support the surrogate mother's right to autonomy over her own body. But her autonomy can effectively impede the autonomy of that of the comissioning parents - if I were pregnant with a severely disabled child I am not sure I would carry it to term. Insurance sounds like such a cold solution, but it's the only one I can think of which respects both parties.

I might sound cold saying that I am not sure that I would carry a disabled child to term. (And I say this as someone who has lost many pregnancies and would be beyond delighted to have a child). But many women, when they find themselves in this situation, choose not to. And I know too well that I can't predict how I would feel if a test came back with something like DS.

Thefishwife I'm sure there are many people who would choose to terminate but you're missing the point.

They had gone beyond the point of being entitled to make that decision. That point was the very last minute before the genetic material was placed in the mother. Plinth is spot on when she says they are in the "reluctant father" scenario.

In your case from a practical point of view your ex has evaded his legal and moral obligations (at the mimimum financial) That makes him a nasty piece of work, but he's not right.

But her autonomy can effectively impede the autonomy of that of the commissioning parent

To which my response is "And so what if it does? "

The relationship is not capable of being equal. Contracts don't have to treat parties equally to be fair and binding.

Add message | Report | Message poster KoalaDownUnder Sat 02-Aug-14 07:59:11
Know one was saying she should be forced but this happens they made it clear they could not cope

They never said they could or promised to take the child she took the step to have the child knowing they would not want him and she had no money to care for him