To say there is no such thing as "altruistic" surrogacy?

[FannyCann]

To say there is no such thing as altruistic surrogacy and that this fiction is a massive state sponsored fraud?

The Law Commission has a Consultation to review surrogacy laws in the UK and you have til 11th October to respond.

There are 16 questions relating to payment, but they find themselves between a rock and a hard place. Admit women are paid for this “service” and recommend full commercial surrogacy puts the UK on a par with countries such as Uganda, the Ukraine and Russia. The UN Special Rapporteur links commercial surrogacy with the sale of babies. So of course we don’t do that in the UK. Oh no. We have “altruistic” surrogacy here. Surrogates are merely recompensed for expenses incurred as a result of the pregnancy, plus the odd “gift”.
So altruistic that from the Law Commioners own research into payments surrogates have been receiving, the median payment was £14,795.54 and 9.61% were paid more than £20,000.

Payments were claimed for things like takeaway meals and cleaners.

This is clearly State Sponsored Fraud. I challenge anyone to produce receipts to prove their pregnancy cost them £20,000

I also suggest that this puts surrogates in a tricky situation should HMRC or the benefits office ever take an interest in the origin of that £20k. It is very wrong for the law to encourage this fraud.

I ask you to look at the background and if you want to have a say into whether commercial surrogacy should be allowed in the UK please respond.

Here is a link to the Nordic Model Now template which you can download and use to respond in ten minutes.

https://nordicmodelnow.org/2019/08/30/how-to-respond-to-the-uk-surrogacy-consultation-in-10-easy-minutes//_

You can find moe background and discussion of the Consultation on this thread.

Building families through surrogacy: A new Law - Consultation
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3649812-building-families-through-surrogacy-a-new-law-consultation

Unless you've been through the heartache of miscarriage, pregnancy and baby loss and infertility you cant possibly understand what would drive someone to pursue surrogacy

Been through 3/4 of those, still think surrogacy is wrong. Because babies aren’t presents or products, they’re people.

Those saying it is unfair on the baby. Do you support also sterilization for those who are drug users or who have had a child that ended up in care? It seems to me those children didn’t ask to be born into an abusive horrible situation yet you don’t seem too concerned with stopping those children being born even though they weren’t given a choice? I saw a ‘mother’ screaming on the train calling her two year old a ‘little shit’ and saying if her other 5 had been like him she would’ve stopped at one...

I have no issue with a baby born via surrogate and brought up by it’s biological loving parents who are ready to be parents and dedicated to their child and where the surrogate is compensated and counseling and proper regulation are in place.

@womanaf
Me too which is why can't bring myself to say it should be outlawed

@Alsohuman
Unfortunately I think any subjects involving having children/not having them seems to make people aggressive on their views it's A very emotive subject x

I don't know how I feel about the government having the ability to have people sterilised but honestly yes I do think some kids are better off not being brought into a shitshow

Those saying it is unfair on the baby. Do you support also sterilization for those who are drug users or who have had a child that ended up in care? It seems to me those children didn’t ask to be born into an abusive horrible situation yet you don’t seem too concerned with stopping those children being born even though they weren’t given a choice?

Yes, lots of children accidentally end up born in terrible situations (and yes, I do care and actually that means there are lots of children to adopt and probably fewer adoptive parents if surrogacy is legalised). The difference is that in surrogacy you are INTENTIONALLY creating an awful situation, where the baby is removed from the mother at birth - which in all other situations we say is 'tragic'. You intentionally create an awful situation for a baby, knowing you are doing so, for money.

It's like the difference between accidentally killing someone (awful, but shit happens) and intentionally planning to murder someone.

What about egg donation OP? Because I don't think that young women with a precarious financial situation donate their eggs out for the joy of giving babies to wealthier couples? And the side effects?

Doesn't that bother you?

Why not just be the best aunt? that's such a horrifying thing to say to someone who is infertile that I am speechless. But you probably won't get it, along with the "just adopt" brigade.

Isn't it selfish to have a baby with a sperm donor (an option that is so popularly given on MN)? You are depriving your child of his right to have a father after all.

You may not spend that amount when being pregnant with your own child.

However, most people don't keep up with their usual standard of housework, cooking ect. Whilst people would accept this as part of bringing their own child into the world why should they accept a substandard of living when they are already helping someone else?

The same for time off work ect. The surrogate is already doing an amazing thing and any loss of earnings or potential earnings should be compensated. These are costs that families may have to endure for their own child but they shouldn't for somebody elses.

Let alone if the birth ends up being complicated and recovery is incredibly painful and long lasting. Why shouldn't the surrogate have paid help? Just because they are happy to be a surrogate it doesn't mean their lives shouldn't be made as comfortable as possible throughout the process.

To be honest I am surprised the amount isn't more.

@PeggySuehadababy
Completely agree - If surrogacy isn't altruistic then egg and sperm donation certainly isn't either - if you ban one you should ban the other

At least with surrogacy the child will know both it's biological parents. With donation either one or even both biological parents are not in the equation

The better financially well off effectively fund the ivf of the poorer as the egg receiver pays a much higher cost for ivf than the woman donating - the only difference being that in surrogacy the poorer woman does the incubating

A friend of mine offered to be a surrogate for her sister, just out of the goodness of her heart, bless her.
She's a kindly soul, so no moolah would have changed hands.

But it didn't happen, in the end, because my friend's husband made such a bloody big deal about it.

Thank you @AnnaSteen for so eloquently describing my stance on this. I’m with you 100%.

Those saying it is unfair on the baby. Do you support also sterilization for those who are drug users or who have had a child that ended up in care? It seems to me those children didn’t ask to be born into an abusive horrible situation yet you don’t seem too concerned with stopping those children being born even though they weren’t given a choice?
I know the damage that is done to those children, in part ‘just’ because they were separated from their mothers (regardless of any other issues). That people should conceive children to do this to them intentionally horrifies me.

I see your concerns.. but most surrogacy arrangements are between family members of people who already know each other. The costs of pregnancy are big, ask anyone who has had a difficult pregnancy! It’s just we aren’t used to seeing a figure on that because women’s costs are measured often.

I think the law strikes a good balance. It will never be perfect but we don’t want a woman who had cancer being criminalised because she has paid her sister’s Deliveroo bill whilst she was carrying a child for her.

Thanks for the link OP. I will definitely respond using that template.

I 100% do not agree with surrogacy - altruistic or commercial - the fundamental principle is the same with a different business model. It comes down to deliberately bringing a baby (a human being not just a play thing) into this world only to separate them from their mother. It absolutely represents commodification of babies and wombs for rent. I'm sorry if that's upsetting to some people but this is what surrogacy is ultimately. Yes I'm sympathetic to those who struggle with fertility etc but as others have said, having children is definitely not a human right. Babies are not to be gifted or sold. I don't know what world we are creating where medical advances can allow for such potential trauma to be incurred unnecessarily on women and children... But hey it's your body right??

This isn’t about telling women what they can and can’t do with their bodies though is it? It’s about telling people what they cannot, and should not do with the body of someone who doesn’t have the ability to consent.

And the comparison with termination is simple. During the time of pregnancy a woman can terminate her pregnancy until the point the foetus is viable. After that she cannot. Equally no-one would say it ok to kill a baby after birth if you want to make the comparison with termination. At that point it has nothing what so ever to do with the woman’s bodily autonomy and everything to do with the baby’s.

Infertility is unfortunate but sadly for some people it is life. Bearing in mind that IVF or a surrogacy or donor conception may not work anyway so there are no guarantees. Just because something can be done, doesn’t mean that it should, regardless of how much heartache that might cause someone.

Adoption from many foreign countries has now been banned due to the fact that rich westerners were essentially buying babies from abroad. I’m sure those couples are heartbroken that they will never have their own children, but that doesn’t mean it’s ok to commodify babies in order to satisfy the desire of adults.

And no, I don’t agree with donor conception either. The very fact that donor conceived babies felt the change in the law was necessary due to the fact they felt they had no identity says everything about it. Again. It’s about the child’s rights not the intended parent’s. Once a child enters into the world everyone else looses the right to that child....

Those saying it is unfair on the baby. Do you support also sterilization for those who are drug users or who have had a child that ended up in care? yes on a sliding scale. Drug users should be given help to be rehabilitated and keep their babies where possible. People who abuse their children to the point those children are removed though should be sterilised. Some of these people have baby after baby after baby and then all that happens is that they’re taken away so the parent goes out to have more babies and so the cycle continues. And that applies to men and women IMO.

Wow.

@Douberry but if I'd carried an embryo of my best friend and her husbands making for them, then I really wouldn't class myself as the baby's mother. My oven, their bun.

The baby would class you as their mother.

Unfortunately nobody has found a way to explain genetics to a newborn.

But hey it's your body right??

Correct, and whether they want to be a surrogate once or ten times, without compensation and altruistically, it's none of your business. Women are not stupid creatures who need someone reminding them that they are commodified or not. Believe it or not they can make their own minds up.

OP, I'd count your blessings instead of yapping at other people's choices. Two children after 40, easily conceived and healthy. You have no way to know how you would have reacted to infertility. And I don't think a trip to Peru or a jack russell would have been equal to your daughters.

You have absolutely no idea that the baby would class anyone as its mother. There really is some serious bullshit on this thread.

As an adopted adult, who was adopted as a baby, and have no memory of it, I have so many scars and I wish I wasn't an adopted person.
I don't wish I hadn't been adopted of course, that was the best thing for me, but it was about me, the baby.
I just can't get on board with having children for them to be adopted more or less.
It's 100% no from me I'm afraid.

@Ineedacupofteadesperately how many children in care have you adopted? Given you care? Or is that too much effort for you and It’s easier to compare a loving family bringing up their biological child who was born via surrogacy to intentionally murdering someone and how people who can’t have children shouldn’t be allowed have their biological child via surrogacy as there will be less people to adopt the children you ‘care’ about?

As previous posters have said having children is not a human right - so all those opposed to surrogacy agree we should definitely sterilize those unfit to be parents? They shouldn’t be allowed to have children. Those children didn’t ask to be born or suffer the horrific consequence of being separated from their parents through being taken into care? Or being abused or born drug addicts?

So those talking about altruistic surrogacy, I presume you are talking about host surrogacy only? What about straight surrogacy then? Where the baby is biologically that of the mother, and where the mother’s family, her other children, will be involved in her pregnancy and her giving away their sibling. Do people really think that is ok even for altruistic reasons?

@IHaveBrilloHair but surrogacy means being brought up by your biological and genetic parents. They are your parents. Even if you can’t get on board with the biological mother being their mother then their father is their father so it’s more similar to being brought up by your father and a step mother who loves you and wants you more than anything.

It’s completely different to adoption?