AIBU to think this is human trafficking?

[OhHolyJesus]

Following the Ukraine babies being stranded in a Kiev Hotel (being cared for by "professional babysitters" during the lockdown as the parents can't get to them), I've been following media coverage...

As France bans all surrogacy I thought this was interesting.

www.france24.com/en/20200618-ukraine-s-covid-19-lockdown-leads-to-baby-pile-up-and-surrogacy-backlash

"She described the parent-surrogate relationship as one of "mutual need", a simple transaction between a woman who needs money and a couple desperate to become parents."

If this is a transaction how is this not buying a baby?

Totally agree Ylvamoon

(And what you said before).

The adoption is secondary, because the law in the destanation country in regards to parental rights. For these babies to be adopted, they need to be SOLD in the first place.

The adoption is required to be done before the baby goes to the adopting parents. It’s not a case of the baby arrives in destination country, goes to its new home and then months late is adopted. The adoption is a precondition of doing a surrogacy contract. When a girl is kidnapped and sold to a brothel, there is not a precondition of adoption. There is no one appointed guardian or foster parent by a court either. That is human trafficking. In surrogacy, the baby spends zero minutes without a parent who has parental responsibilities.

they are taken from their country of birth without their consent or consideration for their future and welfare. The babies have nobody who speaks up for them.

There is consent. Parental consent is the legal standard for consent involving a minor. Their mother speaks for them. Which you do not have in human trafficking. In human trafficking, you have kidnapping either by force or deceit.

And there is consideration for their future and welfare because in most cases the babies are going from poor, deprived, destitute background to richer, privileged backgrounds with greater opportunities for their future than if they had not been adopted. Surrogacy adoption agencies are regulated and inspected in both countries.

I agree nonaltruistic surrogacy is problematic because of the potential for exploitation of both the adoptive parents and the birth mothers. But that doesn’t mean all surrogacy is bad and should be banned.

The only real difference to the baby between surrogacy and regular adoption is that the mother has decided to have her baby adopted before getting pregnant instead of after getting pregnant.

In addition, the money that exchanges hand in an altruism based surrogacy is reimbursement of the extra expenses the biological mother has incurred by being pregnant and giving birth. Especially in countries where there is no nationalised health care. There is nothing wrong with a surrogate mother saying, happy to carry a child for you if you cover my expenses. That’s not buying a baby as a product or a slave.

@PlanDeRaccordement Adoption is secondary a process in the case of surrogacy.

Weather you need to be approved before or after the baby is born doesn't matter. As it stands with adoption, one needs to be approved first, before a child can be placed in the family.

Someone decides to buy a baby, and of course they have to adhere to the laws of their own country = being approved for adoption, sometimes, that's not even necessary if the baby is genetically half theirs, (and in many western countries that is a shady concept. See Bridget's story.)
That leaves the woman/ mother of the baby who has most likely turned to surrogacy due to poverty. She is exploited, without any rights to the baby, she cannotspeakforthe baby. And there is still no assessment on the basis of Paramountcy Principle for the baby.

The baby exists because it has been bought, there is no consideration for the child's welfare, ethnicity and cultural heritage. As would be considered in an "normal" adoption.

... and if you dig a bit on the internet here is what UK law thinks:
These three elements all form part of trafficking:

• The act: recruiting, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons
• The means: force, fraud, coercion, deception
• The purpose: exploitation

transportation and transfer... or receipt of persons - enough said!

Source: www.unseenuk.org/modern-slavery/human-trafficking?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI0Iy-jcKQ6gIViK3tCh0Gvw7cEAAYAiAAEgKybvD_BwE

IMO surrogacy is exploitative and bad for women.
objectnow.org/surrogacy/

I read the new Ruby Speechley book about surrogacy earlier this week. It's billed as a 'psychological thriller', but it's starting to look scarily less and less like fiction.

but it's starting to look scarily less and less like fiction.

Indeed, see below - I won't paste text as it would need a trigger warning.

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/agra/gang-of-5-child-traffickers-held-3-baby-girls-rescued/articleshow/76486339.cms

Adoption and surrogacy are entirely different.
One places a child with a family where, for whatever reason, they have been delegated from their own family, the mother. The other creates a child expressly for that newborn to be removed from the mother.

The two cannot new compared.

Surrogacy laws differ widely across the globe, from pre-birth orders, to parental orders to adoption. The Law in the U.K. will likely change from 'reasonable expenses' to payment (although it's often deliberately called 'compensation'), so commercial surrogacy, buying and selling babies, will be permitted.

How can we be ok with this?