Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

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

334 replies

LRDtheFeministDragon · 15/02/2018 13:15

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.

OP posts:
bananafish81 · 16/02/2018 00:27

When it comes to surrogacy, a woman who loves another woman as a relative or friend undertaking surrogacy, is a tiny tiny fraction of the number of children born to surrogacy.

In the UK the number of children born through surrogacy who were born overseas via commercial surrogacy arrangements is still very much the minority, vs a majority of surrogacy births in the UK to UK surrogates through UK laws. I can only echo @mustbemad17. I wish you could see the surrogacy communities to see the friendships and stories of different journeys. It really is based in friendship and trust. Globally commercial surrogacy may dominate but in the UK that's not yet the case

crunchymint · 16/02/2018 00:28

I thought most surrogates in the UK did not know the parents they carry a baby for, before they arranged the surrogacy?

BarrackerBarmer · 16/02/2018 00:28

bananafish81
I'm sorry for your heartrending situation.

But as you asked, the option I think is 'none of the above' since the friend becomes a surrogate in every example.

The reason ethics are considered at all is because we each of us would abandon our own ethics in a desperate situation.

Hypothetically, if someone offered me a black market organ to save my child's life, would I accept it rather than let my child die? Yes. Do I oppose black market organs? Yes.

We have not the strength to live our ethics in every circumstance.

I do think it is wrong to use, borrow, hire another woman's body, even the most kind-hearted altruistic woman in the world, to create a child that will be taken from her, and she from it. I think the harm that comes from treating a person and their body as a commodity is too great to society. A woman risks death or injury in childbirth. No woman should undergo that risk for anyone but herself, and society should not countenance anyone compelling or entreating a woman to do otherwise.

I can still empathise, but I do think it is wrong.

crunchymint · 16/02/2018 00:31

Recent figures from the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) show that record numbers of UK babies are being born to surrogate parents - 167 last year, up from 47 in 2007. Like the Griffithses, many couples go to countries where, unlike in the UK, commercial surrogacy is legal. Data released earlier this month show that in the past three years over 1,000 hopeful couples have travelled to a total of 57 such countries.

www.telegraph.co.uk/lifestyle/wellbeing/11496662/Record-numbers-of-British-parents-are-turning-to-surrogacy.html

NinjagoNinja · 16/02/2018 00:41

I don't want to add further hurt to your troubles bananafish but I would strongly support a move to ban surrogacy, in all its forms.

barracker has expressed perfectly what I was wrestling with. Yes, I have compassion for you. But on balance I feel it is wrong to trade in women's bodies and to trade children. I am also against sperm and egg donation as I believe it is wrong to deliberately deny a child the right to know its parents. I know that's not your situation.

I also believe freezing embryos is unethical, precisely because of the moral maze you now find yourself navigating.

Returning to the OP, I think it's a feminist issue when men seek to eradicate mothers from babies' birth certificates to support the fantasy that they have somehow created a baby together.

WannaBeWonderWoman · 16/02/2018 01:52

I agree Ninjago. I've never been comfortable with any kind of artificial insemination where donor eggs/sperm are used either, in cases where the child will not know or be raised by one or both parents and it being a deliberate act. It goes against our very primal instincts

I think the right of a child to be raised by the parents whose DNA it shares and the woman whose womb grew it, trumps the wants or needs of any adult.

I also think it is an unnecessary future minefield of biologically related adults who don't know that they are related. The consequences could be pretty horrifying in 50 years time as it becomes more common.

bananafish81 · 16/02/2018 07:16

Thank you for sharing your thoughts - I respect your opinion, it's an important debate to have.

I am also against sperm and egg donation as I believe it is wrong to deliberately deny a child the right to know its parents. I know that's not your situation.

ninjago Do you find cases of known donor gametes, where the genetic parent is known to the child from the outset, equally unacceptable?

I also believe freezing embryos is unethical, precisely because of the moral maze you now find yourself navigating.

Interesting. It's increasingly the case that more and more cycles are recommended to be entirely freeze all - whereby all viable embryos are frozen immediately and transferred in a frozen cycle - because it's safer and the outcomes are better. In some cases, like mine, a fresh transfer was not safe due to risk of OHSS. So in all these cases, you would rather the embryos were discarded immediately rather than frozen? Or that IVF shouldn't be attempted at all?

The net result is the same whether the embryos are fresh or frozen. They're either donated to research or discarded if they're not used. Except that with frozen embryos the couple can have a chance of a successful outcome vs if they're immediately discarded. We signed consents to say if at the end of our storage period we still had embryos in storage, we would like them donated to scientific research. Would it have been better that the embryos were immediately donated to research or discarded,without ever being used in an embryo transfer, to avoid being frozen? It's not always possible to predict whether a fresh transfer would be unsafe.

Embryo freezing is also necessary for genetic testing. Currently IVF with PGD (genetic testing for specific genetic diseases) is available on the NHS for certain inherited conditions. For example, if both parents are carriers of diseases like Tay Sachs or Huntingtons Chorea: embryos can be screened so only an embryo free from the disease is transferred. This is to reduce both the incidence of deadly or life limiting diseases, and also the number of terminations for medical reasons if a baby is affected.

Do you believe such couples should not be able to access IVF with PGD? Would it be better for them to have to have to terminate successive natural pregnancies if they don't wish to pass on the disease? Or should they not try for children altogether (if embryo freezing and donor gametes should not be allowed)?

Proseccopanda · 16/02/2018 08:03

As a surrogate myself, I cannot fathom how anyone could be against it in all circumstances. My SIL had to have a hysterectomy in her early twenties due to cancer. I have 3 beautiful children, and it was heartbreaking to think that they may never experience the joy of a child of their own. I would do it a million times over. I think it's one of those many things where unless you're in that situation yourself, you can never truly know.

LRDtheFeministDragon · 16/02/2018 08:44

banana, I'm sorry to hear of your struggles, and thank you for taking the time to share them.

OP posts:
stitchglitched · 16/02/2018 08:53

I don't object to surrogacy where a close friend or family member, already known to the IPs, makes an unsolicited offer to help and they are carrying the IPs genetic embryo. I think an existing relationship should need to be proven and counselling should be mandatory. Those are the only circumstances in which I think surrogacy should take place.

bananafish81 · 16/02/2018 10:55

I don't object to surrogacy where a close friend or family member, already known to the IPs, makes an unsolicited offer to help and they are carrying the IPs genetic embryo. I think an existing relationship should need to be proven and counselling should be mandatory. Those are the only circumstances in which I think surrogacy should take place.

So no one who wants to be a surrogate should be able to do so unless they happen to have a family member or close friend who is unable to carry?

I face both scenarios you describe

My dad's partner has offered to surro for us. We didn't ask and would never dream of ever asking anyone to surro for us. She wouldn't consider doing it otherwise. If she were to become a surrogate it would only be to help us

My friend is someone who I met through a mutual friend. She has wanted to become a surrogate for some time - since before her third child was born. Now she's completely her family with her fourth child, and has been sterilised, she is really keen to pursue her dream of helping another family to have a child. We were introduced because we are both starting to explore the world of surrogacy to be able to support each other. Through our friendship, she has decided she would like to surro for my husband and I.

She is already signed up with surrogacy UK and wants to be a surrogate regardless of whether we match or not. She would like to do her first journey with us, but plans to pursue surrogacy whether or not we proceed.

Counselling is mandatory at any UK fertility clinic to undergo a surrogacy transfer.

In your opinion, you believe that my dad's partner should be permitted to be a surrogate mother for our genetic child, but my friend should not?

stitchglitched · 16/02/2018 11:15

I don't believe strangers should be able to seek each other out for the purpose of surrogacy, no.

BarrackerBarmer · 16/02/2018 11:19

If the worst case scenario can be imagined, and is unacceptable then the decision is clearer.

If a surrogate gestated a baby, gave birth and then couldn't part with the child she created with her body, then she remains that child's mother,, or she should, I believe. I can't countenance the cruelty in forcibly taking a child from her mother. If that child is grown from a donor egg, how is this different from a couple who have undergone IVF to create their own child? Who is the child's mother? The egg donor, or the woman whose body literally has created the child?

I believe we must always default to the woman who carries the pregnancy. Her body, her child. She may choose not to see it that way, but the ethics of the situation must default to that position and allow her to willingly relinquish her child. Because in the case of a woman who can't or won't give up her child I don't want a law that can rip a child and the mother who created her apart because: contract.

The law in the US horrifies me.

There are so many other ethical challenges too: the risk to health, the compulsion to terminate, or not to terminate, the control over another person's body, the sense of possession over another human.

There is a disconnect between what an altruistic person would willingly do, and what society should explicitly prevent from happening.

Hypothetically, I would willingly die and donate my organs to save my children's lives, and so would many mothers.
But, I don't want our society to allow a nation of mothers to do this - I want the law to explicitly prevent doctors from facilitating parents to end their lives to make their children live.

It is and should be about more than whether the individual participants are willing. It should be about whether we should accept this as a practice.

crunchymint · 16/02/2018 11:42

I wonder how children will cope as adults knowing that their mother chose to carry and gave birth to them and give them away.
The rules on anonymous donor insemination were changed because in spite of parents thinking children would be fine with anonymous sperm donors, many when they became adults deeply disagreed with this. I suspect it will be the same with surrogates. Because however parents see it, I suspect some of the children born to this will see it differently when they grow up.

bluepears · 16/02/2018 11:48

those of you that are against surrogacy i have a simple solution dont become surrogate mothers
'I wonder how children will cope as adults knowing that their mother chose to carry and gave birth to them and give them away.' i assume your against adoption then

NinjagoNinja · 16/02/2018 11:51

bananafish you've said yourself this friend is someone you've met through the the surrogacy community. its about disingenuous to pretend you would have been friends if you'd not gone down this route.

The woman who wants to do this for you, her dream to grow, nurture, sustain and birth a child for another person - that is not a normal dream to have. I find it quite strange and would be uneasy around someone so keen to do this that if you don't allow them to do it for you, they'll keep going until find someone who will. If she was your sister or lifelong friend it would read a little differently - but in this case it is frankly troubling. I would wonder about her motive, her mental health, her attachment to the state of pregnancy that she is so keen to do it another 4 times for complete strangers.

I can understand that you are so desperate for your own dream to be realised that you are prepared not to dig too deeply. I genuinely do understand that.

So perhaps it's for others to be dispassionate and make the rules to protect everyone. This is not something I believe our society should endorse.

I too feel quite heartbroken at the thought of babies being taken from their birth mothers. Even if the birth mother is willing. Terms like gestational carrier are an attempt to remove women from the process of creation, to suggest we are merely ovens for hire.

stitchglitched · 16/02/2018 11:53

Adoption in the best interests of a child who already exists isn't the same as deliberately creating a child to give away. There is a reason why SS bend over backwards to try to keep mother and baby together, because it is better for the child to do so where possible. If someone posted on here that they planned to give up their newborn at birth there would be posters urging them to seek support for their mental health. Label this surrogacy and suddenly it is celebrated.

NinjagoNinja · 16/02/2018 11:54

I assume your against adoption then

What an inane, case comment.

Of course I am against adoption - as a pre-planned course of action! Yes, I would judge someone who got pregnant with the specific intention of handing the child over for adoption. Wouldn't anyone??

Children are adopted because it is the next best thing and preferably to being raised in care.

NinjagoNinja · 16/02/2018 11:55

crass comment, not case.

crunchymint · 16/02/2018 11:56

bluepears Most adoptions are of children taken into care because of neglect, abuse or behavioral problems. And nobody plans to have a baby to get it adopted.

crunchymint · 16/02/2018 12:01

I know this is a difficult issue to discuss. But I think surrogacy is about putting the needs of infertile parents first, rather than the needs of the surrogate or the child.

bananafish81 · 16/02/2018 12:49

*I believe we must always default to the woman who carries the pregnancy. Her body, her child. She may choose not to see it that way, but the ethics of the situation must default to that position and allow her to willingly relinquish her child. Because in the case of a woman who can't or won't give up her child I don't want a law that can rip a child and the mother who created her apart because: contract.

The law in the US horrifies me.*

The law in the UK does default to the woman who carries the pregnancy. That's precisely how it works.

The law doesn't differentiate between:

A pregnancy where the baby is genetically the birth mother's
A pregnancy where the baby has been conceived via donor egg and carried by the birth mother
A pregnancy where the birth mother is a traditional surrogate and the baby is genetically theirs
A pregnancy where the birth mother is a gestational surrogate and the baby has been conceived via donor egg
A pregnancy where the birth mother is a gestational surrogate and the baby is genetically the intended mother's child

In all cases the birth mother is considered the legal mother

The rights of the surrogate must be protected

However most surrogates don'tbelieve the current legal framework does protect them as they would wish

Most surrogates almost universally don't want UK law changed to permit commercial surrogacy but do want the law changed to permit pre birth orders if that's what the surrogate wants

@mustbemad17 is a surrogate and has strongly advocated for pre birth orders, she has argued that this would offer surrogates significantly more legal protection if they had access to them. current framework for parental orders means surros have no protection if IPs were to hypothetically change their mind.

bananafish you've said yourself this friend is someone you've met through the the surrogacy community. its about disingenuous to pretend you would have been friends if you'd not gone down this route.

Absolutely agreed. And I don't pretend otherwise. We wouldnt have become friends if we were not starting to explore this route. DH and I haven't yet decided if we will pursue surrogacy at all. Much less whether we would proceed with this particular match. We have become friends through these circumstances and I am happy to have got to know her, regardless of how things pan out

*The woman who wants to do this for you, her dream to grow, nurture, sustain and birth a child for another person - that is not a normal dream to have. I find it quite strange and would be uneasy around someone so keen to do this that if you don't allow them to do it for you, they'll keep going until find someone who will. If she was your sister or lifelong friend it would read a little differently - but in this case it is frankly troubling. I would wonder about her motive, her mental health, her attachment to the state of pregnancy that she is so keen to do it another 4 times for complete strangers.

I can understand that you are so desperate for your own dream to be realised that you are prepared not to dig too deeply. I genuinely do understand that.*

I actually share your view. I do still find it strange that a woman would want to do this. I cannot imagine wanting to do this. It's not something I would be able to do. That's one of the reasons I've valued chatting to so many different surrogates. Because I am trying to get my head around why a woman would choose this path. You've suggested I don't want to dig too deeply. I actually do very much want to dig deeply! It's not a normal dream to want to carry someone else's child. I entirely agree. But the women who choose to be altruistic surrogates do feel this way. I wanted (and still want) to better understand why. We haven't yet decided if we will proceed with exploring a match precisely for this reason. The woman in question has undergone extensive implications counselling to explore her motivation for wanting to surro. If we were to consider exploring the possibility of proceeding with a match, I would want us to undergo counselling together. I cannot speak for her, I can only take her at her word that she feels her children are the centre of her world, and cannot imagine not having a family of her own, and that because she has had such easy pregnancies she would love to be able to make someone else's family complete. I cannot make the mental leap between the first and the second.

The only comparison I can make is that I would have loved to have been able to be an egg donor. I have lots of eggs and make great embryos. I would have loved to have been able to help another couple to have a much wanted and loved child. I am not eligible to donate eggs because of a family medical history, and now I'm too old anyway. But I appreciate others wouldn't understand this drive - so that's about as close as I can get to even having a vague comprehension of her motivation

I know you think that I am brushing this under the carpet to pursue a selfish desire to have a family, but that genuinely isn't the case. I don't know if we will proceed for that very reason, and out of a deep concern for any surrogate's physical and emotional wellbeing.

alpineibex · 16/02/2018 12:52

See ninja, I'm the complete opposite. I feel heartbroken thinking about surrogates keeping the baby.

BarrackerBarmer · 16/02/2018 12:56

can someone explain what a "pre birth order" is please?

alpineibex · 16/02/2018 12:56

"willingly relinquish her child"

If it's not genetically related to her, it's not her child. It's the IPs. I don't think I'm ever going to see that any other way. If I couldn't have children, there's no way I would ever choose a surrogate to have my eggs, not with the way the law is at the moment - that the surrogate could just walk away with MY baby, bring up a child that is not hers.

Swipe left for the next trending thread