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.

But lots of adopted children do want to call their biological mother "mum", especially when older. And many adopters and adopter hate the term "tummy mummy".
As surrogacy is relatively new, you do need to look to the much larger number of adult adoptees for some hints. What will you do if your biological child (who will not remain a "bub"!) feels like them?

I find the language twee too, but I'm not convinced it's just down to discussing surrogacy. I find quite a lot of things are described to children in a twee fashion, and then it passes to adult discussion.

bananafish I wasn't referring to your specific situation as clearly if you were to have a child as a result of surrogacy you'd be the biological mother. It was in relation to a few other posts which seemed to me to downplay the role of the biological mother in a surrogacy scenario where egg donation is also a factor.

Thehogfather that's a good point. Everything is simplified down for children - we talk about IMs having 'broken tummies' & the like too. As kids get older everything grows with them...i'm soon going to have to have a proper chat with DD about why her dad isn't around. Current explanation of 'mummy & daddy aren't friends so don't want to see each other' won't cut it once she is older!!

The biology is played down in surrogacy because everyone knows it isn't what makes a person 'mum' or 'dad'. That's the be all & end all of it I guess. Even in heterosexual couples who use TS surrogates, the IM is & always will be 'mum' - does it diminish their input & value compared to their partners who have biological connections to the baby? I don't think it does

Even in heterosexual couples who use TS surrogates, the IM is & always will be 'mum' - does it diminish their input & value compared to their partners who have biological connections to the baby? I don't think it does

No I don't think it does either (although I'm not quite sure what a TS surrogate is?). But we don't need to shy away from acknowledging that there's a biological mother in the scenario too. I get the impression from some of the posts above that there might be a reluctance to use this term or downplaying of the role from some who've gone this route.

OK I'm not about to have a pop at anyone who's done it, but surrogacy is something I really have reservations about. The only circumstance in which I can see it working is if the surrogate is a really close friend or relation (e.g. sister) who will have an ongoing loving relationship with the child. In no way could I ever pay someone or be paid to have a baby and then give it away. When I was pregnant I wasn't aware of whose DNA was growing inside me, it was a baby. My baby. I have serious concerns about children growing up, having their own children and thinking "hang on, I have so much love for this child, how could someone just hand me over?". I have total sympathy for the women who give birth and then decide they can't hand over the child to the "biological" parents, because a contract doesn't turn off your hormones. I also worry about poorer women becoming "rent-a-womb", which is a really unsettling idea for me. If I was told tomorrow I couldn't carry any more children but I've just won the lottery I would be happy with the one I have or adopt.

Apologies That - TS is traditional surrogacy, aka where the egg used is the surrogate's own.
GS is gestational surrogacy, where the egg is either the intended mother's or a donor egg from elsewhere.

Square i think the difference is because a surrogate baby is created surrounded by people who love him/her. The baby is conceived specifically for the intended parents, otherwise that baby wouldn't exist. So rather than losing the person who carried them they are gaining an extra family.

Not sure if that explanation even makes sense...i have brain fuddle so apologies if it doesn't. I know what i'm trying to say!!

Thanks for the explanation must. As I've said previously, the day to day caregiver role of a Mum in a surrogacy situation isn't undermined by acknowledging that, where this is the case, there's a biological mother in the scenario too. It's just a statement of fact but it would appear some feel that it undermines the Mum in some way to acknowledge this?

mustbemad17 I know people have a lot of really good reasons for it, it's just something I could never do, and I think people do need to consider the feelings of everyone involved, including the surrogate and the child. I remember reading an article a while back about surrogates in india essentially being exploited because the cash was too good to turn down when they're in dire poverty.

I have to say that I cannot get my head around traditional surrogacy at all. I can understand surrogacy where you carry an embryo that is genetically the intended parents, but even then I think reducing those surrogate mothers to just a 'carrier' dismisses the biological reality of carrying, nurturing and birthing a child which is all done by her body. I believe that whoever grows and gives birth to the child should be viewed as the biological mother and I'm glad the law in the UK reflects that.

Apologies if this has been covered already, but is surrogacy really so different to donor? Assuming, of course, that it is all above board and the surrogate is not being exploited.

Square India have completely overthrown their surrogacy laws now - which i fully agree with. In the UK & the US it's a choice not something done out of desperation.

That it's always acknowledged who birth mum is. That's a part of the journey & of the baby's life. But it isn't considered to be the important factor in the journey if that makes sense?

I guess I see it as one of the most important factors, as the child wouldn't be here without it! It all dependa on how it's approached by the parents in terms of what they tell the child and the access they have to information about the surrogate and even contact if they (the child) want it.

There's no statistics that I know of showing the percentage of surrogates that don't keep in touch with their IPs & surrobabies, but my experience - and of several PP here - is that you're bonded for life. You become almost one giant family. I send watsapp messages to my surrobub, & we send photos & videos back & forth regularly. I know what's going on in her life more than I do about some members of my own family tbh!

I've yet to meet a surrogate who goes into a journey not wanting contact. Many of us have kids of our own, we have to take them into consideration throughout too

That's probably the best scenario must in terms of contact and awareness. Unfortunately it's not guaranteed though.

You also raise a very interesting point we haven't touched on before in that surrogates who use their own eggs will likely have children already and I wonder how they'd view the fact they have another half sibling out there and what contact they might like with them when they are older.

My DD is 5, she knows my surrobub was in mummy's tummy because the boys tummies were no good. As she gets older obviously things will change. But even without the biological link, for a child watching their mum carry a baby it's important that they know why & where that child is going etc.

No.

I wouldn't mind the pregnant bit (I have been pregnant and had a miscarriage) but would hate the giving birth and then the actual having to look after a child bit! That's why I haven't got one!

If I could do the pregnant, hand over the minute I go into labour then have the nice bits like pushing a pram in summer and 2 hours Christmas morning before the tiredness and over excitement set in, then I might pay for that! Not really going to happen though realistically, is it??

I've yet to meet a surrogate who goes into a journey not wanting contact.

And yet I can well imagine that the IPs who choose surrogacy over adoption may decide they'd rather have a situation in which a formal contact agreement is not set up in advance and they don't have to stick to it. In adoption they don't either but there are more or less always social workers in your life who will try and make sure you do if it continues to be appropriate.

I know that many PAPs chose to adopt from China because they didn't want to have contact with the birth family. They didn't want to feel the child was less "theirs". We didn't adopt from China and like adopters from some other countries including our children's home country we chose the country in particular so our children can know more about their birth family/origins.

Going from the surrogacy groups i was part of (which was many) that's wrong. IPs want contact as much as surrogates do, it becomes a part of the contract showing intent to a relationship. Adoption is different in that sense because you don't start a journey to conceive the child you take home. You don't take part in every aspect of the pregnancy, from scans to prenatal appointments to the birth. I understand some comparisons between surrogacy & adoption but ime this isn't one of them. It's far easier to cut a child's extended family out of its life when you've never met them

I must admit I don’t really see the angst over TS rather than GS, in my mind I didn’t want anymore children, so I was donating my egg and going one step further and growing it too. At no point in the pregnancy or afterwards did I feel bonded with the baby, I can’t really explain the experience, only to say it was quite surreal and massively empowering.
After the baby was born I looked at Him as I would friends or family’s offspring, at no point did I think, oh he’s biologically mine!

I throughly enjoyed the process, the excitement of the intended parents, the tears at the birth(yes both Mum and dad were there and down that end) and the happy little family they now are, there’s nothing quite like it and yes it does give me a buzz and a warm feeling inside and make me feel a bit special(although I don’t go around saying that) as it is, not many people can or do, do it.

If others want to see it as giving my baby up, that’s their problem, I see it as giving their baby back. We all have a great relationship, see each other several times a year, text and phone but equally are not in each other’s pockets-all the way along I’ve let them lead the way with contact as I don’t want to intrude, but they genuinely like coming to see us and my other children. Surrobub is almost 4 now so is starting to understand bits and pieces and his Mum and dad say he was in my tummy because his mums was broken, he understands my children are his half siblings(again led by them) and will continue to begin to understand the whole process as he gets older.

Btw my children were 3-12 at the time and were fine with it, they thought it was a nice thing to do and my 3 yr old took great delight in telling people I had a baby in my tummy, but it wasn’t mine!! That produced a few looks of shock haha.

makingmiracles DD used to tell her friends that i had a baby in my tummy that wasn't ours!! Was so funny watching the reactions

No. I would never exploit another woman’s body in that way. Horrified at the number of women on this thread who think it’s ok to rent another woman’s womb and see her go through pregnancy and childbirth then separate mother and baby at birth.

I'm still trying to understand how many people call it exploitation.
Its clear that at times there are women who are exploited. However the majority of these cases are agreed, consensual contracts between adults.
The surrogate is paid to do this, so how is it exploitation if they are paid fairly?

I think it's pretty well explained above disappointed.

What's 'fair pay' for starters, for access to someone's body and the risks they will take on as part of that? If a woman has limited choices but they feel they don't have other options available where they could earn the same amounts, or they feel for economic reasons it's the best (only) option you are basically purchasing their consent.

It's particularly horrific to do so in countries where poverty is rife and the women are treated very poorly but it's problematic, even in wealthier countries, to buy the use of someone's body. There will always be the possibility of exploitation where money changes hands.