To say these men shouldn't be allowed to keep this child.

[GrabbyGabby]

2 men hire a surrogate to have a child for them via IVF. They wanted 2 boys (had names and gmail accounts for them already🙄).
The IVF clinic implanted a female foetus, and now they are suing the clinic.

I don't think they should be allowed to raise a child they clearly don't want.

www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/same-sex-couple-sues-fertility-clinic-over-alleged-wrong-sex-embryo-implant/

YABU they will be fine parents and their daughter will in no way be scarred for life

YANBU babies arent commodities. They should never be bought and sold, and being female is not a defect

What's wrong with holding a company accountable?

They paid extra for a service that wasn't carried out, they have every right to fight that.

While I have the utmost sympathy for your situation and I do with you every success with your treatment, having a biological child is not a right. Commercial surrogacy exploits vulnerable women and commodifies children. In my view, it is an utterly unethical practice.

You can't buy or sell organs, so how on earth people think it's ethically sound to buy and sell babies I cannot get my head around.

We all know that removing a child from its mother is traumatic to both. It's a necessary action in some circumstances, hence why we have adoption. But to deliberately create a life to remove from their mother is beyond dystopian. We don't remove puppies and kittens from their mothers until 8 weeks.

If there were no babies needing loving families through adoption I could (almost - with a squint) see how you might think it's ok. But to create new commercial babies when so many children are desperate for loving families is awful.

Why is it abhorrent to ask for financial compensation when a company messes up? Sex selection in the US tends to cost in the $25,000-$40,000 region, in addition to the other costs associated with surrogacy.

It's abhorrent to buy a baby. All the other financial stuff snowballs from there. I did say that it was commercially correct, but that the initial situation is morally wrong, sex selection is wrong, and continuing to treat a child as defective goods is morally wrong.

What an idiotic point @alphapie Older children who are removed from their parents are being removed from harm. Creating a baby to purely remove it from its mother is vile.

@OchonAgusOchonOh I'm not talking about commercial surrogacy 🙄
If someone who I knew and wanted to do that for me why would it be wrong?

@alphapie your comments lack substance and knowledge so I don't particularly care for your opinion. I'm just as entitled to mine 😊

So, do you think that ANYONE, regardless of their sex, is an unfit parent if they have used a surrogate?

If you befriended a couple and your children had play dates together and you later found out that child was born via surrogacy, would you now thing that they were unfit, and would you stop leaving your child in their care?

These two things aren’t as neatly divisible as you suggest. Nobody is arguing that the couple aren’t legally entitled to bring a claim. We wouldn’t be discussing it now if they were.

There is a huge countervailing factor here, though, and that is the child herself and her well-being. I don’t know much about the psychological impact of knowing that an inherent characteristic is so unacceptable to your parents that they took steps to avoid it - and sued when that failed - but common sense says it could be pretty negative.

It’s not about whether they wanted a girl or whether they can bring a claim - it’s about whether it is a good idea to bring a claim given that the parties will be identifiable and we’re talking about a child here, not an inanimate product.

(Obvious caveats for sex-based medical issues apply.)

@OchonAgusOchonOh completely agree

I’m not sure about unpleasant and I wouldn’t blame the child but I would not be friends with anyone who used a commercial surrogate

Spot on, on all counts.

Rubbish
nobody should be allowed to buy babies, it’s not homophobic to state that

While altruistic surrogacy is less likely to exploit the surrogate, damage to babies removed from their mother is well documented. Why would you deliberately do that to a child?

@MattoMatto I think you underestimate how common having sex preferences is and how many children are aware of it, at school many of my friends were aware that mummy or daddy wanted a boy and got them (a girl instead) and the same in reverse, it's not something in my experience many parents hide, as the vast majority get over it, as these parents are likely to have done.

The clinic should have refunded the costs and paid compensation without fuss, they're the ones who have forced this into the spotlight. The parents are merely asking for a very reasonable settlement.

No different to the cases of women who went for an abortion, that wasn't carried out properly, suing the clinic for costs associated with raising their child.

I think people forget how expensive life is in America, here it wouldn't make much of a difference 2 children or 3, but when you have to pay for their medical cover, education when going to college and all other types of shit it does make a difference

It's nothing to do with the sexuality of the parents. They have hired the womb of a woman reducing her to an incubator (and the idea that this is 'empowering' or a 'choice' she would make even if she weren't desperate is hopelessly naive). Then they have received what they perceive as a 'defective' child because she is female. And yes, I think any parents who go online and shout to the world that they not only didn't want their child but they are nothing short of furious that they now have to raise her as an 'extra' and need the money for it because they still need their two perfect sons to replace her should definitely be investigated by social services - no matter how the child was conceived. There is a huge difference between gender disappointment and getting on with it and what this couple have done.

Utterly unethical and arguably misogynistic. For what it's worth, I'm against commercial surrogacy which is essentially trafficking and relies on the desperation of women to rent out their wombs. However I do think there are a few rare situations when altruistic surrogacy can work; my friend was a surrogate for her twin (in the UK), lots of counselling and planning and done so well with lots of support for everyone.

This is not remotely close to one of those situations.

@Hoppinggreen good thing I never claimed those saying it's wrong to buy babies are homophobic then isn't it.

Some of these comments however are clearly based in homophobia as they wouldn't have the same view if this was a straight couple having gender disappointment. If you think parents should have their child removed due to not wanting a girl and having a girl, that view should apply to straight and gay couples, the fact these posters only aim that at the gay couples is a clear indicator of homophobia

I think people forget how expensive life is in America, here it wouldn't make much of a difference 2 children or 3, but when you have to pay for their medical cover, education when going to college and all other types of shit it does make a difference

If you can afford to use a commercial surrogate in the US, you can afford to raise three children rather than two.

This.
Ugly, ugly business. Buying and selling babies and the bodies of women.

Some of these comments however are clearly based in homophobia as they wouldn't have the same view if this was a straight couple having gender disappointment.

What are you basing that on?

I'd feel exactly the same way if it were a straight couple.

I think people forget how expensive life is in America, here it wouldn't make much of a difference 2 children or 3, but when you have to pay for their medical cover, education when going to college and all other types of shit it does make a difference

Sorry I am reading this as if you were British you could dilute the awfulness of having a girl by having a couple of boys. Is that it?

Buying of women's bodies for their own "needs". Disgusting.

The difference is in cases of general gender disappointment there isn't costs involved.

There are in this case.

This is as simple as medical company offered x service, charged for it, didn't provide said service and now customer wants compensation. Remove the surrogacy element no one would be saying they're unreasonable

Gosh you really struggle to read if that's the conclusion you have come to.

Anyone that does this procedure to pick and choose the sex of a child is ridiculous and would cause resentment towards the child cos its not what they wanted. What do they expect to happen get a refund or exchange after the birth??