If you had money to burn, would you use a surrogate?

[Hippiesip]

Say you're having difficulty TTC a second or third child, would you pay for an American surrogate if you simply didn't want to wait/go through the pregnancy?

I think I would. I loved creating my son but pregnancy was extremely difficult for me mentally and emotionally. I would rather not doing it again, but still growing our family.

No, and the attitude I've seen from some people hoping to find a surrogate disgust me. They wish It was more like America so the women had less rights to her baby. And let's not pretend that people donr pay over legal expenses. There was a couple in the news who had paid a woman 12 grand to carry there baby. She was to get more after. She never was pregnant, this woman didn't work, I knew her personally and I wouldn't let her near my kid. Yet these people were happy for a hugely obese mentally ill woman to carry there baby. Just because you and the people you know had happy legal surrogacy experiences doesn't make it everyone else's. And paid surrogacy is absolutely comparable to prostitution.

One very practical thought that springs to mind is that most of those are employments and will usually attract decent life cover.

Sure, but what good is life cover if your dead? Or badly injured? I mean it's better than nothing but you'd rather be healthy than have the money.

I have several problems with surrogacy but lack of insurance isn't really one of them.

No.

If I could conceive again, then no. Probably not. I’d prefer to carry the pregnancy myself. If I was unable to carry a pregnancy, absolutely and in a heartbeat.

I'm pretty much totally against surrogacy. Another woman putting her health and her life at risk to then give away her baby is too much of an ask.

@stitchglitched adopted children in the uk do get new birth certificates.

Yes! Due to an awful labour I had birth injury, trauma, pnd, PTSD. Due to it, I'll never have another child, but would like one. A surrogate would be perfect, but we can't afford it. It's also not legally the same here as in America!

Yes! Due to an awful labour I had birth injury, trauma, pnd, PTSD.

You'd prefer to pay another woman to go through that instead then.

I think in this discussion different types of surrogacy are all getting lumped together. There is a difference between surrogacy in countries where women are exploited, surrogacy in America in which surrogates can be paid, and surrogacy in the uk which is altruistic. Our surrogate set her expenses to cover what she needed for everything pregnancy related, she was not paid. I do not agree with exploiting women, I don't like the system in America where you can pay for surrogacy, but as my chance of carrying was ripped away by cancer and we chose to have children through surrogacy...I know many families in the uk who have been made through surrogacy. It was, and will continue to be a beautiful thing. Yes, things dan go wrong, but this happens a lot less than the media etc would have you think.

The UK has strict legal arrangements that mean the mother who gives birth can keep the baby if she wishes, but I still have ethical concerns, especially when the baby is biologically the mother’s giving him/her up.

UK couples with lots of money can buy a baby from a surrogate in another country, including a baby that is genetically the surrogate’s. The sums of money are high. That’s not ethical IMO. I don’t think the surrogate’s decisions can be true consent to take all the physical and mental health risks when money is involved.

No, I think I’d probably adopt instead

Personally no, morning sickness aside I enjoyed a lot of being pregnant and I had easy births. My friend however did use a surrogate for her daughter as she couldn’t carry herself (hysterectomy at a young age). It went well. There isn’t anything exploitive in the way it’s done currently. The woman who carried enjoyed being pregnant and earned a good amount from doing so (comparable to working) so she could stay home with her own children. I think she went on to be a surrogate to another couple a couple years after.

Btw intended parents take out a fixed term 2 year life insureance policy for the surrogate, so surrogates are insured for at least 200k for the period of conception and for a year after the birth.

adopted children in the uk do get new birth certificates.
No, they get a certificate of an entry in the adoption register.

No they get a new birth certificate.

It replaces the previous birth certificate

To those who are opposed to surrogacy in all circumstances, I would be interested to know which option you think someone in this position should take:

The couple have had multiple rounds of IVF, none resulting in a live birth

They have 5 frozen embryos left - all five are euploid and have the potential to become people. The path of trying 5 more goes is not an option because specialists all over the world have confirmed that the woman's body cannot support a pregnancy and no more transfers will be possible

1.A friend of the woman has wanted to be a surrogate for a long time. She has had full implications counselling about pursuing surrogacy. She offers to carry the woman's child to help her and her husband have a family.

The case is reviewed by the fertility clinic's ethics committee to be satisfied that all parties are entering into the process willingly, making informed consent and are physically well enough to proceed, and the welfare of the child is being considered and protected. Full life cover and any expenses are paid. The surrogate receives no financial compensation for being a surrogate.

The pregnancy is successful and a much wanted and deeply loved child is born. The baby goes skin to skin with the woman, the child's intended and genetic mother, as soon as he or she is born. The intended mother breast feeds her baby. The surrogate grants parental responsibility to the intended parents and a parental order is granted by the family court. The child is brought up knowing their story. They know how babies are made, but they also know that their mummy's tummy didn't work, but the woman they know as their tummy mummy wanted so very much for them to be born that they were grown in her tummy instead. The surrogate remains an ongoing presence in their life. The families remain friends and are in regular contact.

1. The couple decide not to pursue surrogacy. Adoption is not an option for them. Their friend goes on to become a surrogate for another family, to help them have a child. The couple remain childless. They donate their embryos to another couple, to help them to have a much wanted child. The records are transparent and the child can find out their genetic origins when they are 18.

1. The couple decide not to pursue surrogacy. Adoption is not an option for them. Their friend goes on to become a surrogate for another family, to help them have a child. They donate their embryos to medical research to help scientists better understand infertility and miscarriage to help other couples. The couple remain childless.

1. The couple decide not to pursue surrogacy. Adoption is not an option for them. Their friend goes on to become a surrogate for another family, to help them have a child. The embryos are discarded. The couple remain childless.

I am the woman. These are our embryos. My friend is the surrogate. We have not yet decided how to proceed. The end result of option 1 is the outcome for the vast majority of surrogacy cases in the UK (as making miracles Mrsmaxwell and Beepbeepwhatever will attest to)

What do you believe is the preferred outcome of these options?

Bananafish, your situation is in the UK where we have a good legal framework, so it’s a personal matter for you and your friend.

Different in the US and other places where big payments are made.

In scenario 1 though under UK law the surrogate could change her mind at any time until signing the paperwork and keep the DC.

Altruistic surrogacy where a friend or loved one carries a couple's genetic child for them is IMO completely different to a surrogate using their own eggs or commercial surrogacy.

bananafish81

I'm sorry to hear about your situation. In the case you described, I wouldn't be against surrogacy. I'm mainly against surrogacy when women are doing it for financial reasons rather than altruistic ones and in cases where a surrogate is used to provide a baby for two men...as I explained earlier, because I believe it to be morally wrong to create a baby with the knowledge it won't have a present mother. That's not the case in the situation you described.

I hope my next comment won't offend you. I genuinely don't want to upset but I do think there is a narrative currently where the pain of infertility trump's everything. I'm not saying it is not a sad situation but I don't believe we should blindly try to resolve infertility by any means regardless of ethics.

In scenario 1 though under UK law the surrogate could change her mind at any time until signing the paperwork and keep the DC.

True. In 99% of cases this doesn't happen. In those tiny minority where it has, it's tended to be where UK surrogates went to IVF clinics abroad where the process isn't approved by an ethics committee, or traditional surrogacy was pursued privately without undergoing implications counselling.

Surrogates find this idea laughable - it's a common misconception, although a very valid risk and one that has to be considered in implications counselling. The surrogates I know say that if they wanted more children, they would have a child of their own with their partner! They wouldn't go through pregnancy with someone else's child just to have a baby.

Most surrogates in the UK are actually more afraid that the IPs may change their mind and they will be left with legal responsibility for someone else's baby. That's why most surrogates within the community would advocate for pre birth orders but without losing bodily autonomy or moving to commercial surrogacy

No offence taken at all. I completely agree with you. I strongly believe in the importance of ethics in anything fertility related and believe strongly in regulation and ethics committee approval for all treatment

To have IVF in the UK all paperwork is registered with the HFEA, and one of the documents is specifically about the welfare of the child. Gamete donation cannot be paid for

I'd love to ser pre-birth rights being given to IPs in the UK. Personally I believe the contracts that we all put together & sign should be legally binding rather than just something to show intent. I also firmly believe that where the IF is the biological father to the baby, he should automatically go on the BC instead of the surrogate's husband.

In my case I was single, so IF went on the BC & automatically took 50% of the rights over the baby girl.

To PP who said surrogates give up their baby, that isn't how we see it. I've often heard it being described as a special type of babysitting for 9 months, which I love! Handing my surrobub to her dads was an amazing moment & at no point did I feel like a part of me was being ripped away. And biologically she is mine. I visited them two weeks later to register the birth & it was like visiting a friend's new baby. It takes more than biology to create that link between parent & child