To think there's a valid discussion to be had about the ethics of surrogacy?

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

Just what the title says.

I know some women become gestational surrogates out of altruism, and that in some places (not the UK) women can be paid quite a bit to be surrogates. But I still think the ethics of it is worth discussing.

I'm curious how other people see this. I worry that it's so easy for women to be exploited. And it does seem to me that there's a gendered issue here. I'm not sure men 'get' how difficult and potentially dangerous pregnancy is.

mustbemad I applaud you for being able to be a surrogate but when you say biology doesn't make a family, I am not sure that is how children see it which is why I am so hesitant about surrogacy and donating eggs/sperm. I remember hearing so many stories about children who had been adopted in the 60s and how not knowing their biological parents had really affected them. There have been a few children born using donated sperm/eggs who have spoken out against this saying they struggle to cope with this. One child going through that is too many IMO.

Im not sure i understand the question? I have no problem with it. I would happily do it if someone I knew well needed my help. I would also do it for a stranger if they wanted to pay me expenses! I have 2 DDs and hated pregnancy. Had no PND or bonding issues afterwards (I BF and was a SAHM for 9 years etc) but hated being pregnant, was sick constantly and felt little attachment to them while pregnant. Also I would assume any woman knows the risks and dangers of childbirth so dont see why "men" have to understand? this has confused me

Well, for one thing, I doubt 'any' woman understands the risks and dangers of pregnancy. It's a matter of being educated about them, isn't it? And plenty of women aren't. That's obvious. Just in the last few years I've read far too many articles written by women who had no idea they might become incontinent, permanently disabled, suffer fistulae, etc. etc.

I think, though, that men's understanding is relevant here, because - like it or not - men have a lot of power here.

Want2b i'm still in touch with my IPs & surro daughter three years down the line. I'm her godmum, have an active part in her life. Ime its rare for IPs & surrogates to lose touch (here at least, obviously surrogacy using surrogates abroad is different). So whilst i'm not her mum, she knows who i am & as she gets older she will know where she comes from etc. I see it as a bond for life & we are all fully open to her questions as she grows.

Ooops, posted too soon.

There are pages and pages in Marx about the heartbreaking and terrible toll that Victorian factory work takes on the bodies of the workers. Using a whole range of sources, he documents people who are starving because they can't earn enough to eat and who are vulnerable to disease as a result; people living in terrible conditions who are exposed to all kinds of danger; people who are so tired they have lethal industrial accidents; people who are basically used up and clapped out in their 30s or 40s because of the arduous nature of their work. Social reproduction is seen by him literally as something that keeps the body functioning - so eating a good meal is important for maintaining it for more work the next day.

While we often congratulate ourselves that labour conditions are better now - largely, by the way, thanks to the use of collective action to reduce working hours, and improve pay and conditions - work still takes huge bites out of people. There are plenty of jobs where people are still physically used up in a few decades, and plenty of others where stationery diseases of obesity and stress prey on people.

In terms of this thread, people need to show that surrogacy is some kind of special case. Otherwise, it become part of a more general objection to capitalist relations (which would destroy the liberal, capitalist assumptions of most Mumsnetters).

User thank you for sharing that court judgement, I've just read through it and found it quite upsetting. That woman was clearly vulnerable and the total lack of care for her welfare (offered an extra grand if she needs a hysterectomy!) is shocking. It just shows that even in the UK, where commercial surrogacy is not allowed, there is potential for exploitation.

TheRagingGirl: I feels very much like buying a woman's body - from that point of view, it's too close to prostitution and slavery for me.

This. From a feminist perspective, it’s not just about whether an individual surrogate understands the implications and risks, it needs to be looked at from a broader view. I also think it’s commodifying a female-only resource and the risk of abuse of such a resource is extremely high.

I have very close friends organising a US surrogacy and if I'm honest I'm struggling with it - I can't deny that the thought of them browsing brochures of young women posing in bikinis and stating their IQ and all their credentials in return for $$$$$$$ made me feel sick. They started trying to find an altruistic surrogate in the UK but said demand far outstripped supply. And they don't want to adopt because they don't want a child from a damaged background.

I have major fertility issues so I find it hard to separate out how my own situation is affecting my feelings (no doubt a good dose of bitterness and resentment) about the ethics of buying a woman's eggs and renting her womb, at a risk to her health. My friends are two men, but when I have discussed this people who were opposed felt the same about heterosexual couples doing it too for sure. But these were all people who'd had children or decided they never wanted them. I think struggling with fertility is so hard it makes it difficult to look objectively at things.

Men will never understand the full toll pregnancy takes on a woman. Neither will a woman who has never been pregnant. They can read about it & educate themselves but until you experience it you never fully grasp that. Does that mean that my partner is a selfish prick because he wanted me to get pregnant? I don't think so, he accepted that I was comfortable with it. That's what IPs do...they have to base everything on their surrogate. It's a partnership

I don’t understand how it can be optimal for a newborn baby to be removed from its birth mother so soon after birth to be given to someone with limited connections. Irrational, I know.

must - true, and I do think about that.

I don't think your partner is selfish (or I hope not). I don't think surrogacy requires people to be selfish, either. But I do worry that it seems to be talked about in a way that acts as if the woman's contribution is nothing. That is quite different from you having a baby with your partner.

Fabulous posts @whiskyowl - agree totally about the marxist analysis of unpaid reproductive labour. Pity that we''ve lost sight of that analysis ...

LRD - Ian and Adam are going to use Lexi as their surrogate. I think it's shaping up to be verrrrry interesting. Roy and Lexi won't be able to have sex, I should think, for the 9 months after implantation of fertilised ovum on the other hand, who wants to think of Roy Tucker having sex? And Adam is already quite landlordishly proprietorial over Lexi.

I'm rather going off Adam & Ian through this storyline. They are basically buying a child.

But it's the commodification of women's bodies, and the covering up with ideology about "doing it for love" which makes me uneasy.

Surely the logic to this is exactly the same as that of prostitution. Some women are vulnerable and exploited; while others are doing it as a conscious and informed choice; while another minority do it because they genuinely enjoy it (yes, they do exist in both cases).

The women who use surrogates are no better - or worse - than the men who use prostitutes, assuming they both take equal care to ensure the surrogate/prostitute is not being coerced or exploited. Both are using - and risking - another's body as a commodity. It's a conscious transaction.

Loop i bet your friends are paying their surrogate tens of thousands of dollars for carrying their child? I have always been very vocal about expenses (some surrogates actively blocked me because of it). It shouldn't be profitable. It should cover need & expenses; so if a surro needs additional childcare, its covered.

I'll give an example of why i think its IPs open to more exploitation in the UK.
I met my IPs at a time when a gay couple were planning three pregnancies with three separate surrogates. The surrogates were being given the very highest end of expenses plus extras under the table at their request. When the story hit the papers it divided the surrogacy community massively. My IPs were very vocal about how they disagreed with it for many reasons, the biggest being the lack of time between births. My IPs were 'blacklisted' by a group of IPs & surrogates because of their view, & I was pressured into ending my match & instead finding IPs that would 'properly take care of me' - aka give me £15k+ for being pregnant. This could badly have impacted on my IPs ability to find a surrogate, simply because of a disagreement about something so public.

I have heard surrogates say 'they (IPs) need us more than we need them' - it infuriates me. My experiences since 2014 have primarily been of IPs been held to ransom by surrogates, not the other way around. But the laws in this country back the surrogates all the way.

My point is that loads of kinds of work take a physical toll - sometimes a terrible one - on the body. That toll is rarely reflected in the wages for the type of work that does this. If that is the basis of objections, and it has been in many of the arguments on here so far, then surrogacy doesn't look like a special case, or even especially exploitative. To be clear: to say that something isn't especially exploitative is to say that it is no more or less exploitative than other kinds of work, NOT that it's not exploitative at all! (In Marxian terms, for reasons too lengthy to bore people with here, all paid work is exploitative).

Some people on here are making the argument that additional regulation, or different kinds of regulation is needed to protect the vulnerable in the surrogacy field. Others seem to be making a rather different argument- that there is something inherently more wrong with surrogacy than with other kinds of work. I'm interested in what additional reasons the latter group could argue.

Mustbemad- I totally agree with you that blood does not a family make.

Want2be- it seems you know little of today's adoption processes and reasons for adoption. It sounds as though you are also against adoption; would you really deny thousands and thousands of children a family?

LRD i think maybe it goes back to the whole being judged thing. Again i wish i could share some of our groups. IPs on the whole fully acknowledge the surrogates role, birth announcements include phrases such as 'baby x born because of our selfless friend' & 'our miracle baby born because x did something amazing' - but its done amongst friends & family, and the surro community. Because sometimes the backlash can be horrific.

We did a magazine article about our journey, because CAFCASS & our PO judge told us out journey was one of the best they'd seen. We wanted to share that, and publicise how amazing surrogacy can be. I had a mixture of responses, from people telling me we had altered their perception of surrogacy for the better, to people telling me i should rot in hell. I can fully understand why new parents have a desire to avoid that tbh

Pengggwn i disagree with you about that. I believe there are some issues the surrogate should have full say over, but i don't like the fact that IPs have no legal rights to their child until a PO goes through, which can be six months after birth

It sounds that things may have changed since 'my day'. My last surrogate pregnancy was over 10 years ago and when I had the IVF for my surrogate pregnancies I (and DH) had to see specialist counsellor as did the parents and we had to have the case approved by an ethics committee before we could have the treatment. The focus of the ethics committee was not just the adults involved but very much looked at my children, the older child of the first family I carried for and the future children hoped for as a result of the treatment. Social Care did not have any involvement in the pregnancy, cafcass were involved in the parental orders but that isn't quite the same thing as has been described.

I have to say that being a surrogate has been one of the most fulfilling things in my life alongside my own children, my marriage and my career. The children I carried are still an important part of my life so if they have any questions they can ask them freely and I can tell those children honestly that I wasn't paid to carry them, it was something I did because I wanted to.

I wouldn't want to stop any woman having the amazing experience I have but I am not daft enough to think it is a great thing every time, there are so many risks and considerations that do need discussing and protocols put into place to minimise the risks.

I have heard surrogates say 'they (IPs) need us more than we need them' but this is true. And normal, as it should be. IPs should never forget their debt to surrogates. I prefer an anxious IP to an entitled IP.
(If it was up to me, surrogacy would be forbidden except for direct family helping each other...)

must - I can see that too, for new parents - but then, why should they be able to avoid the nastiness if you can't?!

Ofa sounds like it has changed a bit since you did it. Ethical committee still involved in GS i believe, and counselling is still strongly recommended for TS (only mandatory if you use an agency tho).

I agree re having an entitled IP, but the context that phrase has been used ime has been when surrogates have tried to get more out of their IPs 'just because' - sadly seen it a lot recently.

I would absolutely love if there were statistics kept about all of this that we could compare from then & now. It fascinates me...have we gone forwards or backwards?

I prefer an anxious IP to an entitled IP

Agreed, in the judgement shared earlier in the thread the arrogance and entitlement of the IPs was a major factor in the Judge's decision.