paid surrogacy in poor countries is NOT exploitation

[kellyandthecat]

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/20/commercial-surrogacy-wombs-rent-same-sex-pregnancy

julie blindel writes a very self-satisfied piece in the Guardian saying surrogacy should be banned in poor countries because the women there are being exploited. she used a very extreme example - the very sad case of the little boy with down's abandoned in thailand by the australian couple - but that's about it. of course surrogacy should take place in good conditions and no one should be forced into it, but to ban it completely seems VERY unreasonable to me. my sister struggled with fertility problems for years and if they had to they wouldn't have had the money to use a surrogate here in the UK or the USA. it was a HUGE struggle and I remember how hard it was for her. its heartbreaking to think people could be shut off from this option when assuming the conditions are right the surrogates in these countries can earn a life-changing amount of money for them and provide such a life-changing help to those struggling to concieve.

now of course the surrogates conditions have to be good and their compensation appropriate. but i feel like a blanket ban is exactly the kind of not-thinking-it-through that led to all the sperm donation rules being changed so now no men donate sperm any more and we have a huge shortage and crisis effecting those with fertility problems.

No, because the admin fee goes to governments and local
Authorities for assessments in this country and abroad - Not to individuals

The same argument can be applied to prostitution. Do you do that?

As long as they're paid properly, treated nicely and maybe even get an orgasm out of it, seems fair enough, no?

I would absolutely be a surrogate if it were a paid role and there were suitable legislation to protect all involved. I am a middle-class Irish woman. It's completely different to being paid for a kidney, though probably somewhat analogous to being paid for part of your liver? I agree that it's not for everyone but, having had a baby, I believe I would be an ideal candidate. And would be a great way to earn a living!

As someone with a background in bioethics, I'm hugely offended by the assumption that deeply complicated biomedical law has been 'not thought through". Do you have any idea how much time and effort is put into laws like this? Far from being slapdash, Britain leads the world in bioethical legislation. As for developing world surrogacy, of course it is exploitative. Arguably it is similar, if not more dangerous, than selling, say, a kidney. You don't need both kidneys to live but the operation to remove it could kill you-the same is true of pregnancy.

No one should ever be going through pregnancy and birth for money. That leaves a very dubious ethical and moral trail. Pregnancy and birth can be just as dangerous as organ donation (I nearly died during both my births for different reasons 10 years apart in the UK) I would hate any woman to put herself through it for anything other than either the desire to help another couple / person or for the basic instinct of wanting their own child.

'Plus there's a racial aspect too - rich white families trying to rent wombs from poor black women'

Or brown ones, the market is high for this in India.

Disgusting practice.

And you liken an admin fee to a human being so poor and desperate she feels compelled to inject herself with hormones to prepare her body to receive an embryo that is not hers, carry a fetus to term and give birth?

Dear god.

Reiltin, that baby would be partly yours. It is your body that would be growing it and feeding it. I couldn't sell my baby unless I had no choice.

Another YABU from me. You don't need 2 kidneys (or 2 lungs, & can survive with part of liver removed) but I would find it abhorrent to harvest organs for £ in that way too.
Infertility is heartbreaking. But these women ARE being exploited, no argument. Surrogates who do it for love, kindness (& expenses) are amazing. But they have a free choice that those in poverty don't.

It's revolting. The entire practice is desperately wrong and anyone who uses a poor woman as an incubator is a hideous, selfish specimen.

women living in poverty don't have real choices though - that's why they can be exploited

why not be her surrogate yourself?

Also I'm pretty sure that if ever a situation could be described as being between a rock and a hard place, this would be it.

Surrogacy under such poverty can only be a free choice, without exploitation, if these women have any equally viable options. In countries where people are struggling so much, its also high unlikely these women have the means to ensure they receive the right treatment, money or experience.

And yes, if you feel so sorry for your sister, do the surrogacy yourself. Don't expect a poor woman to do something she needs to for money, that you obviously are not prepared to do yourself.

There have been a few high profile UK cases that made me wonder if there was exploitation of a surrogate. Exploitation is not always financial.

A choice that is forced is not a choice. Poor women's bodies shouldn't be commodities for rich people to use. It's wrong, full stop.

i know there are many negatives in the current system and im not trying to defend them. but if those issues could be guaranteed to be removed would you all still be against paid surrogacy? or maybe another example: if women here could become paid surrogates in a very regulated way would you still oppose it

you know i would have actually thought about being a surrogate myself if it had come to that stage with my sister but after five i'm probably a bit too clapped out for the fertility specialist. my DH works with a gay man who had a baby with his partner using a surrogate in the us and it seemed like it was a very positive process and the woman had done several before.

'you know i would have actually thought about being a surrogate myself if it had come to that stage with my sister but after five i'm probably a bit too clapped out for the fertility specialist. '

Sure you did.

How many children do you think these women who sell themselves have given birth to?

Your sympathy seems to extend as far as your own door. As long as it's possible to visit it on someone else's, you're all for it.

A little off target but there is a film called "The island" (starts ewan mcgregor) set in a future Sci fi world where the rich clone themselves so they can have the clones have babies for them and they don't have to go through pregnancy or miss work etc. It turns out the clones obviously have feelings and discover with horror that towards the end of the pregnancy they aren't being sent off on a sleep induced amazing dream to have the baby - they are being killed and the baby is taken via c section. I hope we never end up in a world where something like that happens. To pay someone for surrogacy isn't too far off that kind of world.

mamapain like prostitution it will probably happen anyway underground so why not try and make it as legitimate as possible? its not like banning surrogacy will actually help these women besides making some people in the west feel better about themselves

reiltin thank you for your perspective!

I believe surrogacy is legal in the UK, just not for cash. I am fine with that. But there's a massive shortage because oddly enough women aren't anxious to put themselves through the physical and emotional trauma of pregnancy and birth for purely altruistic reasons.

So don't kid yourself that it's a great option for poor women, and you're really doing them a favour.

Some people can't have kids. Boo fucking hoo. Don't exploit others for your needs. Not limited to this issue.

So it's better to pump some poor woman with your rich bil's spunk and have her body wracked by pregnancy and birth than it is to adopt from this country?

How is this not prostitution?
What about the effects on the surrogate's mental and physical health?
What about the surrogate's family?

Just so your sister can have a "fresh" baby?

It's grotesque, op.

White people buying the use of desperately poor women in third world countries wombs because they don't want to pay first world prices. Yeah can't imagine why that might be seen as dodgy

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2196538/Our-rent-womb-child-Indian-baby-farm-British-couple-paying-20-000-desperately-poor-single-mother-child.html

GRIM

unweavedrainbow if these polices are thought so carefully why is there now a crisis in sperm donation?

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5230890.stm

at "making westerners feel better about themselves"!!!

Why in the Fuckity fuck do you think these parents who pay women to carry their spawn exploit people rather than adopt!!

'like prostitution it will probably happen anyway underground so why not try and make it as legitimate as possible? '

How's it going to happen 'underground', it's not a quick and easy process, unless, the HORROR!, the rich white couple want a bi-racial baby, in which case they would be exploiting poor women for their uterus and genetic material?