To make you aware that surrogacy is going to be liberalised

[VestaTilley]

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/

Nothing wrong with a bit of pragmatism. There are many people who don't technically support termination as a pregnancy choice (I'm not one of them!) but would far rather have regulated terminations than backstreet clinics. It's a very real driver in legislation - we if we can't have the world as we wish it was, we legislate for the one we have. There is no evidence UK surrogacy is going anywhere and it's a mess in the meantime, both in terms of security for surrogates post delivery (they want it cut and dried straightway) and accessing medical treatment for babies.

It certainly isn't. It really, really isn't. Leaving babies in a crazy hinterland fit the best part of a year where their named father is not caring for them or genetically related to them is potentially dangerous and fair to no one.

Well you might feel that way.

My friend, an adoptee, loved her adoptive parents but feels like 'part of her is missing'. She has no known family in the world any more.

She feels a desperate urge to understand her roots and what led her birth mother to give her up.

I suspect traded babies will have similar , if not stronger feelings. After all they are commodities.

Unless you're going to ban surrogacy, you're saying that you're happy with a situation existing where the child and doctor are punished rather than legislate for something you'd prefer not to happen. Okay! No one is going to listen to that and good job too. It is that kind of attitude to abortion rights that lead some people to campaign for a world that would lead to backstreet clinics. We legislate for what's in front of us, unless we're going to successfully eradicate it.

It would be interesting to see if there are any stats from countries that have made surrogacy illegal. To see if they do have an issue with ‘underground’ surrogacy.

I can’t imagine it being the same as something like abortion personally, because surrogacy is something someone would have to actively pursue and plan out happening. Then after there would be a baby whose legally situation was complicated. Whereas abortion is more the result of an accidental pregnancy and people feeling they have no choice. Also when I think about the countries that have the worse surrogacy situations they tend to be the ones where the laws are laxer and not tighter.

Again though it would be interesting to know more about what happens in countries where it is illegal. Because maybe there is an element of stuff happening under the radar.

What is your response to the problems facing children and doctors where medical treatment can't be given unless someone with parental responsibility has given permission and doctors are having to discuss children's medical situations with someone who is not their primary caregiver and doesn't want the responsibility of having to make those decisions?

It's still the case that you are not going to be able to eradicate it because no government has shown an interest in doing so, leaving you with the need to legislate in a manner that benefits the child this is happening to.

A surrogate mother's response to the law commission's report.

twitter.com/harybo007/status/1641062238571184128?s=46&t=3vhG_KDq77qvuwlnTiE6jg

What is your response to the problems facing children and doctors where medical treatment can't be given unless someone with parental responsibility has given permission and doctors are having to discuss children's medical situations with someone who is not their primary caregiver and doesn't want the responsibility of having to make those decisions?

I can see that would be an issue. For me though that is an issue created BY surrogacy. I personally think the principle of the birthing mother having legal parental responsibility should be upheld and that removing that would be more harmful than keeping it on balance.
children who need treatment would receive it, treatment that is urgent would go ahead anyway. I would have thought managing that would have been built into the surrogacy agreement much like any issues thought out the pregnancy would have been.

As an aside - one thing I have wondered, but I’m not sure how is works. Is if one of the intended parents can be put down on the birth certificate. Eg if the father provided sperm could his name not be on the birth certificate there by giving him legal rights from time of registration? Similar to unmarried partners? I see an option like that, where both have PR,as better than the birth mother not having it from birth.

It's still the case that you are not going to be able to eradicate it because no government has shown an interest in doing so, leaving you with the need to legislate in a manner that benefits the child this is happening to.

I’m sure you won’t be able to eradicate it. However I guess we differ in our thinking about if giving IPs more right will make surrogacy less or more ethical. Like I said previously looking at other countries I see those where IP have more rights as having the most exploitative surrogacy. Places like Ukraine and America. I have said previously I think our current set up strikes a fairly good balance. Of course any system will have flaws.

What is your response to the problems facing children and doctors where medical treatment can't be given unless someone with parental responsibility has given permission

How much of a problem is this? Are there many surrogate born babies having medical treatment delayed? Surely in an emergency doctors would make a best interests decision, as they do for any child whose parents can't be reached quickly? And if for some reason the surrogate has to consent to something and won't, they'd go to court and get that overruled, like they do when any parents refuse consent for something a child medically needs, eg Jehovah's witnesses refusing blood products for their child, a hospital can get a court order within hours and give the treatment in that case.

I can't envision this situation where surrogate born babies are not getting needed medical treatment so we need to change the law, the legal provisions we've got where parents can't be reached or won't agree would apply. Or is that just a straw man so that purchasing parents can argue they need parental rights from or before birth for the child's best interests, when it's really for the purchasers wishes?

You didn't answer any of my questions though? You said you people understand why women want to become surrogates, why do they want to become surrogates? Why do so many Ukrainian women want to be surrogates vs Irish women for instance? Why did so many Indian women want to become surrogates vs Irish women? In Ireland(where I live) its possible to become a surrogate, one high profile bloke had his sister be his surrogate not so long ago so I know it is possible yet so many Irish people go to Ukraine for surrogacy, why? I'm sure the same goes in the UK, are Irish and British women just less altruistic that women from Ukraine? Why prior to Ukraine did they travel half way across the world to India if 'many solvent, middle class women' are lining up to have their babies for them in the UK? You said you know why people become surrogates so I would to know why you think this is?

I understand the benefits for the intended parents but I don’t see anything but negatives for the surrogate them selves.

I imagine that many intended parents are fixated on rights from birth and haven’t yet understood that compulsory regulation and increased scrutiny will diminish the limited pool of surrogates that exist making it an ever more challenging process.

I live in a country where it's illegal and there is definitely not underground surrogacy. You can't just hide the fact that a woman has been pregnant and given birth to a baby and you can't just explain away why you suddenly have a baby that you didn't adopt or give birth to. It's an absurd idea.

Several years ago, a couple tried to buy a baby abroad (in India) and they weren't allowed to bring the child into the country. It was an upsetting case but I'm glad the law was upheld. They knew buying babies was illegal, they shouldn't have done it.

I was a surrogate and not once did I feel exploited and at no point did I gain financially.
The eggs were the women's and the sperms was her husbands.
Please don't put us all in the same box. I wanted to help a couple who were desperate to be parents. That's all

Sure, and we're told some women just love being prostitutes too.

I don't see how that really has any bearing on the issue. What do your feelings have to do with the surrogacy farms in India or the production lines in Eastern Europe that exploit women in poverty and use their bodies?

I was a surrogate but before then I had ivf for my 1st child. (Father couldn't have them).

During that process I produced 16 eggs and I gave 8 away. Yes !
Without being paid for it or anything else, just to help someone who couldn't.
Why does it all have to be about money?
Unless you've walked in someone's shoes who can't have kids I don't think you can even begin to understand.

Exactly this. ^ It's absolute nonsense that a baby given to someone else at birth, will be devastated and traumatised for life. They won't remember anything, and people saying any different are talking rubbish.

I know half a dozen people who were adopted at 1-3 years old (by strangers, AND by an aunt, and by grandparents,) because their parents died, and they don't even REMEMBER their birth parents, let alone feel devastation at being ripped away from their bio parents. I also know/know of several children born via surrogate (they are now young adults,) who are perfectly happy, well-adjusted, intelligent, happy young adults.

As long as a child is brought up in a loving caring family, by someone who wants them, and loves them, and treats them well, it doesn't matter if it's not the bio parents.

It seems to me, that some people just don't want people who struggle with infertility, or people in same sex relationships, to have children. The hate and vitriol aimed at surrogacy makes THAT clear. For some people, surrogacy is the only way.

And as a pp said, this image that the haters portray, of some poor young innocent little woman having the baby ripped from her arms, to give to some horrible entitled rich couple, is farcical and vastly inaccurate. Children brought up by parents who used surrogacy or adoption, will have a much better life than SOME children who stay with some bio parents. Not ALL bio parents are good, responsible caring people!

People keep posting 'evidence' as to how a child born to a surrogate (or adopted) feels like a sad, lonely, lost little lamb who is traumatized for life, but it means fuck-all. It's biased 'research' peddled out by anti-surrogacy campaigners.

Hardly the same thing.
A surrogate can't be compared to a prostitute thanks!.
I'm giving one view and taking away the tardiness you are all giving to this topic.
I agree some women do make money and yes there needs to be tighter regulations etc but I have a right to a view

If someone agrees to be a surrogate, takes money for it, and carries pregnancy that is genetically not theirs then why should they be able to keep a baby?

Yes, it's a financial transaction - from the surrogate's perspective! It's not some sort of post-apocalyptic scenario where someone is being forced to give away their baby or forced to get pregnant in first place, so what exactly is so surprising or shocking that a new law is coming in that you cannot agree to incubate a pregnancy, take money for it and then steal a baby that is not yours?

Steal a baby that is not yours?! The only ones taking babies away are the ‘commissioning parents’ who take the babies from the only mothers they have ever known. If we think of surrogacy from a baby/ child perspective it is abhorrent. I can’t imagine why anyone would inflict that trauma on a baby. Particularly the most common form of surrogacy where a woman’s body is ‘commissioned’ in an Eastern European country, the couple wanting the baby won’t even have met the mother, then fly over as she is due ready to take the baby back ‘home’. It’s baby farming and is unbelievable.

I think surrogacy where it’s a family member/ friend who will remain in the child’s life and will stay with the birth mother and the couple for a few weeks post birth securing their attachment with the adoptive parents whilst still having the reassurance of their birth mother (and ideally her milk) is a better option if we are trying to do the best by a child. But the best option would be no surrogacy at all.

There are lots of us who are infertile who are against surrogacy. Six rounds of IVF for us, and no means of conceiving naturally, so we have very much stared down the barrel of no children.

And in fairness, egg sharing is usually done to reduce your IVF bill. The clinic makes a fortune selling them to another couple, so yes it is VERY much about money. Whilst it may be done altruistically in your case it’s generally done by people who really can’t afford the full IVF bill, and the clinic makes even more money.

When poor women are forced into making terrible choices to earn money, they are not free choices.

If a woman gets pregnant via egg donation, is not her baby? Logically, you must think not. Either the owner of the egg is the mother, or not.

You can't steal a baby that's not yours. You can, however, keep your own baby.

Of course it can be compared, both are using a womans body.

Tardiness is not the word you were looking for.

I got nothing but a sense that I may have helped someone have a child.

Exactly this. ^ It's absolute nonsense that a baby given to someone else at birth, will be devastated and traumatised for life. They won't remember anything, and people saying any different are talking rubbish.

You could not be more wrong. Children absolutely can be and are impacted by things they were too young to remember, and there is clear evidence for that.

I know half a dozen people who were adopted at 1-3 years old (by strangers, AND by an aunt, and by grandparents,) because their parents died, and they don't even REMEMBER their birth parents, let alone feel devastation at being ripped away from their bio parents. I also know/know of several children born via surrogate (they are now young adults,) who are perfectly happy, well-adjusted, intelligent, happy young adults.

If you want us to give weight to your anecdotes, you need to give equal weight to the experiences of adopters and adoptees on this thread, who have posted about how they/their DC are and have been impacted.

As long as a child is brought up in a loving caring family, by someone who wants them, and loves them, and treats them well, it doesn't matter if it's not the bio parents.

That is not supported by the evidence. Being removed from the birth family matters, no matter how much you want it not to. I'm an adopter, I'd love it if what you say were true, but it's just not.

It seems to me, that some people just don't want people who struggle with infertility, or people in same sex relationships, to have children. The hate and vitriol aimed at surrogacy makes THAT clear. For some people, surrogacy is the only way.

How is surrogacy the only way? That's not true either, is it? You can be a parent via adoption, and according to you birth family isn't important, so why don't the people using surrogacy adopt? Could it be because they don't want to do it that way, not because they have no option?

And as a pp said, this image that the haters portray, of some poor young innocent little woman having the baby ripped from her arms, to give to some horrible entitled rich couple, is farcical and vastly inaccurate. Children brought up by parents who used surrogacy or adoption, will have a much better life than SOME children who stay with some bio parents. Not ALL bio parents are good, responsible caring people!

Again, no one has said all bio parents are good, or that children adopted or born via surrogacy can't have a good life. I'm an adopter, why would I think that? We are saying that removal from birth family impacts a child, not that only birth families are good enough.

People keep posting 'evidence' as to how a child born to a surrogate (or adopted) feels like a sad, lonely, lost little lamb who is traumatized for life, but it means fuck-all. It's biased 'research' peddled out by anti-surrogacy campaigners.

It's not, it's decades of research which has made a massive shift in adoption practice in the UK. Literally no one has said all surrogate or adopted children are lost little lambs, where has anyone said anything like that? This is not about 'anti-surrogacy' campaigners, it's about wanting the child to be put first. In surrogacy, the wants of the adults are put first.