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

@NightmareSlashDelightful

I do have issues with IVF, yes. But this thread is about surrogacy so I'm not getting into that here.

These men are awful and I can’t believe anyone is defending them. It’s completely wrong that you can just have a baby made to order in a financial transaction and this child is going to know about all this. It’s horrific. This is the way they actually feel about parenthood, that they are entitled to the children they paid for.

Last time I looked, thousands of women do not post here about gender disappointment plus they have certainly not gone to the lengths of paying a clinic to select a sex for them and then suing them cos clinic gets it wrong . And not for a first baby. And probably not for a second.

there is something quite appalling about deliberate sex selection and clinics going along with it. Femicide. Has led to lots of problems in countries like India, China etc

I've seen it expressed many times on threads like these. To be honest they probably get deleted as well, but it always brings them out.

The poster just went ahead and stated what many more think but have the sense not to post, so they go about it in roundabout ways

@Headbandheart you clearly haven't been on the pregnancy topics much then, there are countless posts about it, and comments to from those who are in the same position but haven't posted a thread themselves.

I don't know one woman irl who didn't have a preference when they were expecting, obviously a preference isn't the same as disappointment but to claim it's a small issue is a bit disingenuous.

I am biased as have had sex selective IVF myself, but did so for a girl so in a way am mitigating femicide so...

A baby in the NICU is there because otherwise it would die or be seriously ill. There is no choice about a baby being taken to NICU. Clue is in the name - intensive care.

There is a choice about intentionally creating a child to take it away from its mother.

I am biased as have had sex selective IVF myself, but did so for a girl so in a way am mitigating femicide so...

Thank you for your services to womankind 👍🏻

@B0ssAssB1tch gestational carrier

Not mother

Perhaps you should worry less about your perception of other people being homophobic and consider the absolute misogyny of a phrase like "gestational carrier."

The woman is that child's mother.

I understand that the clinic was in breach of contract because they had promised them a boy. So they are within their rights to sue. However, you would hope that any decent han beings would have been grateful. They shouldn't be able to select gender (other than to prevent genetic inherited conditions) in the first place. That to me is immoral. I think that the worst part of the article is this:

The financial impact to the Sanigers is "staggering" because they ultimately will be raising three children rather than the two sons for which they had planned, the suit states.

It totally devalues the worth of their daughter! I once watched a documentary where two men were bemoaning the fact that their surrogate was overdue and said that, "if it was just our dog, we could force her around the block a few times until she gave birth. We can't do that with a woman". They were utterly vile. Women and girls deserve so much better than that!

I was more making a point about the legal principle of being able to recoup direct losses i.e. a payed for service wasn't provided, contract unfulfilled etc.

Of course you're correct in that this exact situation wouldn't happen in the UK.

The word is mother. Your misogyny is showing.

Yes. She'll know they wanted a boy and got a girl. And were prepared to go to court amidst all the publicity about it.

She has no biological ties to that child.

She is a gestational carrier

@GromblesofGrimbledon she is no more that child's mother than you are.

Would you say the same of a woman who has used a donor egg to get pregnant?

She is all the baby knows, she carries and gives birth to it, she is the mother.

Yes @alphapie, I said we can't know from the information given if they're disappointed, but going through all that effort for a boy raises concerns for me, not because it's surrogacy.

With the non-bio parent adopting the child, there would hopefully be the appropriate checks in place though the US has had some recent high profile cases showing some states' adoption checks are not as strong as many would desire. Any investigation into their parenting and the girl's safety would be separate from this legal case which has sadly been widely publicised which raises concerns about the girl finding it later either way, but general thoughts is that I hope there have been appropriate checks and care.

As for your imaginary cases, again, suing the company makes sense though they have to balance that with their kids knowing. With the first situation with triplets, they're all equally in the same boat so less of an issue though hopefully additional support could also be obtained. With the disability one, that has the same concerns and yes, it would be great if there were checks and preferably support and care. I'm not pro-removal in any of the cases, I'm pro-recognizing a higher risk situation and making additional checks and having support in place, even knowing our systems - and even less the systems of the US - are built for that.

To those who have the same view on straight couples who suffer gender disappointment, fair play, you're an equal opportunity numpty.

Sex disappointment is a wide field. The parent who has a momentary emotion and works through it is not the same as the one who spends months ruminating over it. We know the latter is more likely to be violent, we have plenty of cases and examples on this.

Trying to make all that disappointment the same is bullshit. We can recognize emotions happen and the risks of a parent having on-going issues with a child's sex, even if we can't 100% tell if this specific couple has on-going issues.

Also, is a straight couple one with two straight people or are you using that to mean a mixed sex couple? Mixed sex couples don't have to involve straight people.

I agree. I feel so sorry for her.

This poor kid.

I was told as a child that mum should not have had me because doctors had warned her that her pregnancies were too high risk, and she could die having another baby.

A family ‘friend’ told me that her mother had advised an abortion. Not because they didn’t want me but because mums life was at risk (obviously she had me and she didn’t die in the process). Yes it did upset me and made me feel like ‘I shouldn’t be here’ and that followed me - it still pops into my mind when I’m at a low ebb.

This kid will know that her parents didn’t want ‘her’. She was they ‘wrong type’ of baby. She was a mistake at dispatch, the wrong lack in the envelope, the faulty good.

What would have happened if the child had been born a boy - but with one leg? Deaf? Blind? With a heart murmur? With big ears it a very low IQ? Later found to have autism, epilepsy, or just be a horrible human being who likes to torture small animals…

at what point do these people stop being consumers and become parents?

@OchonAgusOchonOh she has no genetic or emotional ties to that child. She isn't its mother.

A woman using donor eggs raises the child, therefore is legally, morally and emotionally that child's mother.

A woman who has a strangers embryo implanted is neither generically that child's mother, or emotionally that child's mother.

Hence why she is a gestational carrier, just because you don't like the term doesn't make it any less true

Jesus Christ.

I don't remember carrying said child for 9 months therefore being all the baby has ever known: the smell of me, the sound of my voice and my heartbeat, literally sharing my very life.

So they wanted two children (both sons) but have a son and a daughter and are suing because they now NEED to have a third child so they get their two sons? WTAF???

So I guess female adoptive parents aren't mothers either?

Why ‘need’ two boys? What is going on in their little heads? Is the girl a spare?

is there noone in their families saying ‘for gods sake, you are being absolute tits here’ ?