Page 21 | To make you aware that surrogacy is going to be liberalised

VestaTilley · 2023-03-29T13:27:57+00:00

Today, the Law Commission have published their final recommendations to Government, calling for reform of surrogacy laws in the U.K. The proposed change would make commissioning parents legal parents at birth. That means that the birth mother would never be regarded as the legal parent, nor would she be listed on the birth certificate. This has been privately lobbied for behind closed doors, away from women and maternity groups for years. The Law Commission consulted in 2019, but never published their responses or said who had fed in to their consultation. Law firms and surrogacy agencies are rubbing their hands with glee today: I feel physically sick. They would have you believe surrogacy in this country is “altruistic”. This is not the case. Women can receive upwards of £20,000 per pregnancy in “expenses” - which is a huge financial incentive to a woman if they are from a poor background. Do we want to live in a society which creates a servant class of women? Which takes babies away from their mothers at birth? When pregnant we are all advised to bond with our babies, breastfeed if we can and speak to our babies in utero. How does the NHS square this advice with making it legal for a child to never legally have a connection to its own mother? If you are in anyway concerned about these proposals please, please contact your MP and raise all the noise you can to try and stop this before it is too late: [[https://www.lawcom.gov.uk/surrogacy-laws-to-be-overhauled-under-new-reforms-benefitting-the-child-surrogate-and-intended-parents/ https://www.lawcom.gov.uk/surrogacy-laws-to-be-overhauled-under-new-reforms-benefitting-the-child-surrogate-and-intended-parents/]]

Delphinium20 · 30/03/2023 19:14

Evalu8 · 30/03/2023 18:10

As a couple who could not have children naturally our only option was surrogacy. We met a wonderful stay at home mother who was prepared to carry our fertilised embryo and had 2 wonderful children that are our lives. She had no genetic link to them. They are loved and healthy and our surrogate used the money to put herself through college which she missed out on when bringing up her own kids. She eventually secured a job that she had always dreamed of having which gave her financial independence for the first time in her life. She didn’t want to be on the birth certificate but we remained friends with her and her family. We go on holiday together and she loves our kids as if they were her own, but she reminds them that she is not their mother nor could she ever be.

I appreciate that other people will have strong views on the matter, which is fair enough, but the suggestion that this is simply a money making enterprise could not be further from the truth. She did it because she wanted us to also have the joy of having our own family, which is a gift that can never be repaid. Ironically she thanked us for helping her achieve her degree which changed her life, but on the scale of things our part was minuscule in comparison to what she did for us.

As the old saying goes, never judge someone until you have walked in their shoes.

I hope this helps others see that it’s not as black and white as done think.

Thanks for reading

I'm happy your children are healthy, and happy you seem to treat their surrogate mother well and keep her in your kids lives (a rare thing but sounds like a very healthy way to handle it), but you must realize you're talking a bit out of both sides of your mouth. You describe what is indeed a money-making enterprise...the surrogate mother did this for money because she used the money she wouldn't have had to go to school. You also describe it as a gift, but it wan't a gift, it was a transaction because she was compensated beyond expenses. I understand that kind of language softens things but you're rather proving our point than not. Would she have done this if she had all the money in the world? I think that is the question feminists ask when they look at exploitation of women as surrogate mothers. Would this act have occurred if all classes of women were economic equals? That's the lens I'm applying to the ethics of surrogacy, despite some examples like yours that show a better than average outcome.

myveryownelectrickitten · 30/03/2023 19:17

And also this @KLM2023

I can only assume you have your own agenda to push?

It seems pretty unfortunate to refer to everything we know from the last seventy years of research into child psychology and development, about what’s best for the welfare and health of babies and human emotional development more generally, as “an agenda to push”, but that’s pretty telling, I think.

OhHolyJesus · 30/03/2023 19:17

@UpToNewTrix

Just wondering - did you 'incubate' your DD or 'conceive and carry' her?

I'm not being pedantic, just following up my point on language in my earlier post.

myveryownelectrickitten · 30/03/2023 19:37

L3ThirtySeven · 30/03/2023 19:10

Women are human, but not human enough apparently to have the right to decide whether they want to be a surrogate mother. Not human enough to have the mental capacity to assess the risks of pregnancy and childbirth. Not human enough to have empathy or the desire to help other women struggling with infertility.

But women are human enough to assess the risks of going into combat with the armed forces or as humanitarian workers in war zones. We were human enough to risk our lives working on Covid wards during the pandemic.

We are human enough to have the right to terminate pregnancies, and the right to give a unplanned baby up for adoption, but apparently not human enough to start a pregnancy with intent to give the baby up for adoption.

Human enough to permanently donate organs, but not human enough to donate a mere 9months of the function of one organ.

If you think women are human, then give us full agency and control over our bodies.

It’s disingenuous to borrow this kind of language from abortion debates and apply it to surrogacy. What about the baby in all of this?

Believe it or not, it’s entirely possible to be pro-choice on abortion and bodily autonomy and also believe surrogacy is exploitative and wrong to both mother (“gestational carrier”) and the baby.

If it’s not right when it’s poor Indian women being implanted with the embryos of rich white couples, at what point does it become all choicey choicey bodily autonomy in the west? Is there a point at which it becomes not exploitative, and if so, when? If it’s not great for the baby, at what point does it become okay? Yes to Revel Wilson but no to Paris Hilton because we like one and not the other? Yes for Elon but no to Amber?

myveryownelectrickitten · 30/03/2023 19:38

Rebel not Revel obvs, bloody autocarrot

augmum · 30/03/2023 19:44

I didn't think this needed to be said to adults but if a woman wishes to be a surrogate then she should have every right to.

If you don't agree with surrogacy I strongly recommend you don't do it.

Why are your thoughts and feelings more important than those actually affected by this issue?

Should gay couples not have children? Should singles not have children, it's our natural instinct, its what we are here to do, to procreate. For women and men who are unable to do this by them selves it can be utterly destroying and people have lost their lives.

If I choose to be a surrogate it's because Ive had children and women who have had children will know how horrendous it would be to not be able to and I would consider it an honour to be able to help a couple on their journey to becoming their own family.

I am truly blown away by the opinions on this thread.

Flippingnora100 · 30/03/2023 19:45

If you are using the economic difference between surrogates and the people 'commissioning their services' as evidence of exploitation, then doesn't that mean that all paid work is exploitation? Most people wouldn't work or provide services that are paid for if they had no need for money.

I agree that having a child is not a right. I also think it's easy for people who have conceived naturally to judge others who are not so fortunate for their choices.

I think surrogacy is like all sorts of things: prostitution, terribly paid jobs like construction in developing countries with no healthy and safety measures etc. It's a way to earn much-needed money that is probably not going to be ideal for the person doing it. I think the real culprit here is the inequality itself, rather than the means by which money is made by poorer or more disadvantaged people because richer people want whatever they want.

What does removing a way of legally earning money achieve for the person willing to be a surrogate? Not a lot in my opinion.

PS As an aside I've donated my eggs twice for no payment (and my motivation had nothing to do with money). I wouldn't want to be a surrogate though.

coffeeshopmusic · 30/03/2023 19:55

L3ThirtySeven · 30/03/2023 19:10

Women are human, but not human enough apparently to have the right to decide whether they want to be a surrogate mother. Not human enough to have the mental capacity to assess the risks of pregnancy and childbirth. Not human enough to have empathy or the desire to help other women struggling with infertility.

But women are human enough to assess the risks of going into combat with the armed forces or as humanitarian workers in war zones. We were human enough to risk our lives working on Covid wards during the pandemic.

We are human enough to have the right to terminate pregnancies, and the right to give a unplanned baby up for adoption, but apparently not human enough to start a pregnancy with intent to give the baby up for adoption.

Human enough to permanently donate organs, but not human enough to donate a mere 9months of the function of one organ.

If you think women are human, then give us full agency and control over our bodies.

Yes women are human. Congratulations on establishing that.

But why are you willfully ignoring all the ways in which women are exploited?

From sexual exploitation to domestic violence, murder, genital mutilation, child marriage, human trafficking, AND surrogacy.

It is not rich white women who are surrogates - the scope for exploitation is rife.

coffeeshopmusic · 30/03/2023 19:58

augmum · 30/03/2023 19:44

I didn't think this needed to be said to adults but if a woman wishes to be a surrogate then she should have every right to.

If you don't agree with surrogacy I strongly recommend you don't do it.

Why are your thoughts and feelings more important than those actually affected by this issue?

Should gay couples not have children? Should singles not have children, it's our natural instinct, its what we are here to do, to procreate. For women and men who are unable to do this by them selves it can be utterly destroying and people have lost their lives.

If I choose to be a surrogate it's because Ive had children and women who have had children will know how horrendous it would be to not be able to and I would consider it an honour to be able to help a couple on their journey to becoming their own family.

I am truly blown away by the opinions on this thread.

Having a child is not a right.

Spirallingaround · 30/03/2023 19:59

I can’t get my head around this. It isn’t ‘what about all the infertile couples/same sex/celebrities who have an image to sell? Until you’ve walked in their shoes you can’t imagine their pain and anguish’

It’s about a potential power imbalance at play and the effect on a child that is brought into the world with trauma. Because grown adult humans think they have a right to a child that supersedes that child’s right to NOT be separated from its mother at birth. And yes, to a newborn baby the ‘gestational carrier’ is its mother.

Inwiththenew · 30/03/2023 20:01

Sounds a bit handmaidens tale to me. And with birth rates continuing to drop it makes you wonder why they’ve taken this route. Obv if the child has any genetic illness there are going to be issues. It’s mostly not a good idea to lie about biological parentage.

Trishthedish · 30/03/2023 20:01

@hamstersarse i couldn’t agree more. I had a child come to me as she was a sperm donor baby. Her mother died when she was a young teenager. She has a half brother of mixed race and her mothers partner. The child was so lost. She said she had no one that she felt any familial connection to. I felt so sorry for her. Her parents had the best of intentions, but life has a way of smacking you when you’re not looking.

coffeeshopmusic · 30/03/2023 20:01

L3ThirtySeven · 30/03/2023 19:10

Women are human, but not human enough apparently to have the right to decide whether they want to be a surrogate mother. Not human enough to have the mental capacity to assess the risks of pregnancy and childbirth. Not human enough to have empathy or the desire to help other women struggling with infertility.

But women are human enough to assess the risks of going into combat with the armed forces or as humanitarian workers in war zones. We were human enough to risk our lives working on Covid wards during the pandemic.

We are human enough to have the right to terminate pregnancies, and the right to give a unplanned baby up for adoption, but apparently not human enough to start a pregnancy with intent to give the baby up for adoption.

Human enough to permanently donate organs, but not human enough to donate a mere 9months of the function of one organ.

If you think women are human, then give us full agency and control over our bodies.

Also "a mere 9months" - have you been pregnant before?

Do have any idea of the long term impact a pregnancy can have on a woman's body? Do you know how much pregnancies can vary - particularly if it's not your eggs being used?

"A mere 9 months" totally belittles the process.

Norriscolesbag · 30/03/2023 20:02

Twizbe · 29/03/2023 14:42

I will believe surrogacy is not exploitative when a rich woman does it for a poor woman at no expense at all.... yeah doesn't happen does it.

100% this.

myveryownelectrickitten · 30/03/2023 20:03

The “it’s just like any other kind of work really” argument doesn’t wash (same for “sex work”, too, which is where this argument usuallycomes from). Can you think of a legal job that carries the same risks as pregnancy? It wouldn’t be legally allowable, either under employment law or human rights law. (DP is a personal injury/employment lawyer, so I can tell you categorically it wouldn’t!)

Women’s bodies are not workplaces. Human people and human babies are not the same as artisanal producers and luxury goods. Babies are not things, and women are not factories. Just because you think it’s okay for women to sell part of their bodies or for people to “commission” babies does not mean it’s ethically fine.

OhHolyJesus · 30/03/2023 20:10

I think surrogacy is like all sorts of things: prostitution, terribly paid jobs like construction in developing countries with no healthy and safety measures etc. It's a way to earn much-needed money that is probably not going to be ideal for the person doing it.

I don't think our bodies should be chargeable. I'm not anally penetrated in my office job nor would another human being be born if I was scrubbing toilets or stacking shelves. If a risk assessment was done would it be for one person or two (the second one being foetus/baby). Could you be a prostitute and paid for a pregnancy at the same time, if not why not, would that be moonlighting?

I don't charge for the use of my hands whilst typing or my arms whilst carrying stock. It's part of the job, I get health and safety legal protection, there is employment law, benefits, annual leave and a pension. I'm paid for my skills and experience and I can resign. I realise this doesn't apply to entry country but if referring to the U.K. would surrogate mothers get the same, how does annual leave work? Can she have a lunch break and take the pregnancy 'off' for a rest?

If it's a way to earn money it's not altruistic. It's a job, not a favour. I understand it's commercial surrogacy being pointed out here but if money changes hands how is altruistic surrogacy different?

(There is a whole section on expenses in the consultation report but at 617 pages you won't be surprised that I haven't read it all yet!)

UpToNewTrix · 30/03/2023 20:14

OhHolyJesus · 30/03/2023 19:17

@UpToNewTrix

Just wondering - did you 'incubate' your DD or 'conceive and carry' her?

I'm not being pedantic, just following up my point on language in my earlier post.

I can understand why incubate might be a little clinical, although yes I did incubate my DD technically - Webster defines it as: “to maintain (something, such as an embryo or a chemically active system) under conditions favorable for hatching, development, or reaction”.

Surrogacy is clinical though, scary and emotionally draining, potentially more so than your average pregnancy. Changing the law to benefit both parties is a positive change!

Essentially I lucked out with the easy route. And I think the language of “being physically sick” or “shaking with anger” are far more questionable linguistics here.

OhHolyJesus · 30/03/2023 20:18

Thanks for the clarification @UpToNewTrix - I don't disagree that surrogacy is clinical, more so than simply medically speaking. It is clinical because emotions are compartmentalised and surprised. The language is a method of this, a way to make it less human. I don't think it should be the environment that a baby enters the world, where the mother is an instrument to be 'used' by others. Even if she wants to be, even if she wants to help. I'd be asking why not how.

I disagree that it benefits both parties. I would say there are more than two and the benefits are limited to being mostly very one sided.

OhHolyJesus · 30/03/2023 20:19

And I wouldn't pay much attention to Webster, babies aren't hatched either

venus7 · 30/03/2023 20:28

Twizbe · 29/03/2023 14:42

I will believe surrogacy is not exploitative when a rich woman does it for a poor woman at no expense at all.... yeah doesn't happen does it.

Well said.

UpToNewTrix · 30/03/2023 20:30

We can agree to disagree @OhHolyJesus

I think a child coming into the world loved and wanted is a perfect environment. Much better than many other scenarios which are much less child centric but somehow decreed as acceptable.

I currently know a surrogate on her journey and she has spoken about how it protects her and she welcomes the change. That is how my opinions are forged and I don’t see them changing.

I love being a mummy and I wish that for anyone wants it and have the greatest respect for the women who provide that joy for others.

Pinkwithwhite · 30/03/2023 20:45

I would love to be a surrogate, would do it in a heart beat for family or friends. As long as it wasn't my egg.

I have children and they are my everything. Can't imagine someone not being able to have the same.

The baby would not be mine! And I should NOT have any legal rights to that child.

Wouldn't do it for a stranger though.

augmum · 30/03/2023 20:50

myveryownelectrickitten · 30/03/2023 19:07

There’s a lot of evidence for same sex female relationships being just as good as, (in fact possibly actually slightly better) for children. But there really isn’t the same body of evidence for gay male relationships — not at all. I’m a LB woman so I’m well aware of the research that exists — and it rather reinforces, rather than undermines, the importance of the mother-child dyad. This isn’t to denigrate adoptive mothers, nor fathers. But loss and trauma resulting from separation from the mother is a real thing, and it’s dishonest to wish it away or pretend it doesn’t happen.

Show quote history

@mymyveryownelectrickitten can I ask you to please point me in the direction of this research?
I don't mean this as condescending as I realise that's how it can sound over MN but I would be very Interested to read some studies on this

1Week · 30/03/2023 21:00

augmum · 30/03/2023 19:44

I didn't think this needed to be said to adults but if a woman wishes to be a surrogate then she should have every right to.

If you don't agree with surrogacy I strongly recommend you don't do it.

Why are your thoughts and feelings more important than those actually affected by this issue?

Should gay couples not have children? Should singles not have children, it's our natural instinct, its what we are here to do, to procreate. For women and men who are unable to do this by them selves it can be utterly destroying and people have lost their lives.

If I choose to be a surrogate it's because Ive had children and women who have had children will know how horrendous it would be to not be able to and I would consider it an honour to be able to help a couple on their journey to becoming their own family.

I am truly blown away by the opinions on this thread.

How are you missing the point after point drawing attention to the mother/baby dyad?

If the primal bond didn't exist, infertile couples would 'just adopt'
But it does exist, so why does it only matter in the case if the commissioning parent, but not in the case of the baby or the carrying mother?

It is OK to say, some things matter more than an individual (rich) adults most fervent wish.

KimberleyClark · 30/03/2023 21:12

I have children and they are my everything. Can't imagine someone not being able to have the same.

Then it’s your imagination that is limited. Many women are not able to have children but manage to lead fulfilling and happy lives regardless.