Another Kardashian ksurrogacy

[Namingchangeschangingnames]

I guess aibu that all this celebrity surrogacy is problematic?

So khloe’s rep has just confirmed that she’s having another baby with Tristan v surrogate. Aside from the fact, it’s a pretty dumb decision to knowingly and purposefully bring another child into that incredibly toxic relationship where he has such little respect for her, they’ve used a surrogate.

it just feels like with celebrities these days, they want the child but not the ‘difficulties’ of pregnancy or the ‘damage’ it can do to the body. Especially with the kardashians, khloe’s reasoning for a surrogate is that she could be a ‘high risk pregnancy’ with no further clarification of what that means, not that she owes me an explanation but it’s coming across like ‘pay someone to do the grunt work for me’. I mean both my pregnancies were ‘high risk’ ones because I had growth scans, high risk/ low risk are just to designate the level of care you get.

its not just the Kardashian’s, priyanka chopra did it due to scheduling and there was another can’t recall who, but who basically said she didn’t want to take time out of her career right now for pregnancy, yet can have a baby?

It's because many on here aren't pro women at all.

Not pro women being able to chose what to do with their own bodies at least. Also some of these comments are dripping in misogyny

Oh please. It’s the same stupid argument trotted out in favour of prostitution, most by the hard of thinking

Woman choosing what they do with their bodies has got absolutely nothing to do with 90% of commercial surrogates, who are skint and desperate, and will do whatever they can to get cash
Its not a choice when your poverty makes you vulnerable. It’s doing anything you can to bring in cash, even if it means turning a blind eye to the consequences for yourself and the baby you will birth and give away

@SW1amp yep, if you believe women should have agency over their own bodies that includes lots of areas you might not agree, but those women should still have that right to choose

@SW1amp plus in these cases they use professional surrogates, hardly a poor woman off the street

There absolutely has been criticism of men using surrogates, Tom Daley, Mark Feehily and Brian Dowling spring to mind.

I think the legally binding contracts of American surrogacy are absolutely terrifying. Women have no rights in the pregnancy, during labour or after birth. The Handmaid’s Tale come true.
Pregnancy for someone else should never be a job. It can kill you. Disable you for life. Give you lifelong regrets.

The disgusting irony in America of so many states saying that a woman shouldn’t have the choice to have an abortion or not, (when having an abortion is always safer than birth at any stage) yet justifying women doing surrogacy for money, or even just because they want to help others?

When in the entire history of the world has a rich woman ever been a surrogate for a poor woman?
Never. That tells you all you need to know about what’s really going on.

Thank you @fannycann. Very interesting and I'll check out that podcast

Maybe didn’t pick Ronaldo since his fiancée birthed twins recently where only one survived.

Didn’t know MJ used surrogates although I’d rather not think of him anywhere near children either.

But no I don’t think single straight or gay men should be able to rent a womb either.

There is a distinction between altruistic surrogacy and surrogacy as a commodity, which I don’t think you can separate from capitalism and exploitation.

i just don’t understand how you can want a child, a bio child but not have the time to carry it yourself? It makes zero sense. If you want a child without pregnancy why not consider adoption, specifically in your own country, Especially when there are so many children in the world without parents and in the care system.

it’s the flimsy ass reasons like ‘scheduling conflicts’ or being busy or potentially being high risk and maybe miscarrrying, (a risk all women who get pregnancy have) surely less of a risk for her as her embryos would be genetically tested (genetic reasons being the primary cause of first trimester miscarriage) she’d be having the best care to prevent any hormonal issues causing a miscarriage. Bottom line is, surrogacy is easier for her than pregnancy. The cost of the surrogate she’d make in one Instagram post, this is low effort

I don’t talk about paedophiles.

Ronaldo hasn’t actually talked about surrogacy has he? That’s why past threads on him have been deleted presumably as it’s speculation. I presume people don’t mention him as it increases the chance of the thread being deleted. I talk about the Kardashians because they’ve talked about surrogacy so hopefully we’re allowed to comment without deletion.

I just can't get over the best interests of the child not being a factor at all. Looking at the timeline on this the pregnancy was created November when the father was possibly due to be a father again within weeks (he disputed it but was and hasn't seen that child) Surely better to delay and see how that resolves before proceeding.
There's also some suggestion baby has been born before announcing it. The only reason I can think of is in case baby isn't perfect. I do wonder what happens to babies that aren't as expected. That case where couple are suing for wrong sex. My DC was born with a serious physical disability undetected on all scans - would a commissioning couple have taken a baby like her.

The surrogates choice begins before conception, to allude they have very little choice is a bit silly. They have chosen to take part and many do it professionally in the states.

Also the wealthy woman argument is always a bit odd, there are many jobs wealthy women don't do, are they exploitative?

It's a job in some countries, in this case the Kardashians are known for using a professional surrogacy service, as Kim had the same one for each pregnancy, she was also the surrogate for another celeb but can't remember the name

Yes, but we get accused of being homophobic if we talk about those men.

I find all surrogacy unacceptable, I hopd it is banned everywhere for everyone.

@Namingchangeschangingnames do you have any idea the levels of need the majority of adopted children have?

Is your suggestion for a person who doesn't have time to carry a pregnancy and recover genuinely to take on a traumatised child who will need high level of care needs?

What a numpty

Yeah sure but it’s not a free choice is it?

whilst celeb surrogates aren’t exactly going to be poverty stricken women living in the ‘ghettos’ they aren’t multi millionaires themselves are they and say they’re paid 200k/300k even one million dollars for a celebrity like a kardashian that’s a social media post but for that woman it’s more money than she’d make potentially in a lifetime… you can’t separate that from exploitation. If she’s a professional surrogate carrying 4 plus kids that aren’t hers… well, she’s made for life but at what cost?

so yes it’s a choice, but one can say the same for sex work, women choose to go into it but more often than not it’s a choice born from necessity.

if it was Kendal carrying khloe or Kim’s baby then ok, it would be a separate conversation

Exactly, yes
Don't judge a woman's choice, regardless of the wider harms
Drives me nuts

Utter crap. ‘It’s a job’. What nonsense. OK, if it’s a job, where are the

fixed hours and days of work
training and development
right to time off like weekends and holidays
abiilty to be off sick from the job if you get ill
sick pay
holiday pay
pension
medical/disability pension for the future
tax regime appropriate to the job
labour laws that seek to avoid the workers’ death, injury, psychological trauma
employers’ liability
workers’ ability to resign permanently from the job at any time?

in no way does this fit the definition of a job.

No, it's never ok to buy babies and use women as incubators

this ^

yes I do and don’t call me childish names thank you!

My point was if you don’t have the time for a pregnancy, then surely you don’t really have time for a child so maybe you shouldn’t have a child?

or if you can’t have a pregnancy for whatever reason but long for a child and are prepared to care for said child, why not explore adoption?

adoption in the states can work differently too, a lot is from birth before the child goes into the system, now don’t get me wrong of course there are still many potential issues resulting from many things, but it’s not quite the same as an older child who’s been in care.

^dh and I are in the initial conversations of adoption now are bio children are old enough. So don’t numpty me

What an utterly stupid comment, shows you have 0 awareness of employment law in the US to start with.

Also none of those factors makes something a job, by definition this role is a job.

Plus many of those items are covered off within most professional surrogacy contracts.

@Namingchangeschangingnames no, you said she should adopt.

If she doesn't in your opinion, have time to carry a pregnancy, no way should that person adopt.

It's shocking the absolute ignorance around adoption that you and other posters display around adoption.

You have 0 idea why she is choosing to use a surrogate to have a child.

Also if you are ok with the American adoption system, which is far worse for the child than surrogacy (as shown from many studies into this issue) what's your actual problem with surrogacy? For many it's the child and their outcomes that are important, but if you are pro American adoption system (from birth) then you clearly don't care about the child in all this.

For this family, it feels as though they view surrogacy in a similar way as buying themselves a puppy.

But we don’t tell men they can’t have a child unless they’d have time for a pregnancy

and adoption is complicated and difficult process for all involved. Many people after the pain of infertility may not want to tackle that.
also If it’s such a good and simple solution I’m sure many women who didn’t enjoy pregnancy would just do it. But many / most don’t.

I found the Ronaldo situation particularly strange. I don’t understand why he chose to use a surrogate in his early 20s then his Mother apparently raised those children. He then met someone he wanted to have children with and has children with her too. Why use the surrogate at all? I genuinely don’t understand, he was very young at the time so didn’t need to have children. He could just have waited for the right woman to come along (which she did) before he has children.

The Baldwin’s are weird full stop. I used to quite like them a few years ago but then it came out about her not actually being Spanish which was … perplexing. Then they used a surrogate to carry a girl for them while Hilaria was pregnant with another boy .

I get next to non of those things in my job. Not all jobs or all countries are the same. Your definition of job is not everyone else’s