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/

You seem to have forgotten to mention the child. Yet again all about women's 'choices'. Which are not made in a vacuum.

And choice feminism has got us a world where men can be women and OnlyFans is a viable career option.

Oh here we go with the wrong kind of feminist again and women's choices.

According to the liberal feminists there is nothing to see with a woman's body being bought, whether it be for sex or to gestate a baby.

Where money passes hands for the advantage of others (mostly men), whether it be sex work or the baby trade, it is naivety in the extreme to assume the person being purchased has true control.

Sex work is bad enough because it exploits vulnerable women.

The baby trade exploits the mother, because the person who gives birth is the mother no matter what pro-surrogacy believes want to believe, but not only that it exploits the baby. All because an adult can afford to pay, and thinks they have the right, to pay for what they want including babies.

@bringitonnow

My best friend is adopted and is desperate, now in her 50s, to find her birth mother.

What happened to you is immensely cruel, I'm so sorry.

@PaintedEgg don't waste your time arguing with the anti-surrogacy posters on here. If you don't think surrogacy is vile and wrong and evil, and anyone who uses a surrogate is a putrid piece of shite who doesn't deserve children, you are WRONG. No other opinion is allowed on mumsnet about surrogacy, other than it's vile and nasty.

As a pp said, it's funny how these anti-surrogacy haters, are the same people who think women should be allowed to do what they want with their own body, and retain autonomy, and not allow others to tell them what to do......... UNTIL it comes to surrogacy. Oh no a woman must NEVER do this for anyone else. (Have a baby for them.) 'YES you can retain autonomy and do what you want with your body, as long as what you do suits meeeeeeeeeee.'

Disingenuousness and hypocrisy at its finest. And very typical of some feminists.

I CBA to argue with them, because I find their views farcical and ludicrous, and nothing they say will make me think surrogacy is wrong. Nothing wrong with it. As a few posters have said, anyone who says a baby being 'taken' from its mother at 30 minutes old, who then goes on to be raised by non-biological parents, will be traumatized for life, are talking utter rot.

As long as a child is loved, and wanted, and cared for, who gives a shiny shit if the child is not the parents biological child? It's so rude and insulting to people who are adopted! And also, as some people have said (including me,) some people who ARE born to, (and raised by) their biological parents have shit lives, horrible upbringings, no love, and no-one caring for them. The very idea that a child born to a surrogate and given to someone else at birth, (or people who are adopted,) will have a traumatic and devastating life, is utterly pathetic.

And as has been said, many women who become surrogates are NOT the poor iccle women being abused by nasty rich people at all. The fact they often only get 'expenses' dismissed THAT theory!

I'm out. As I said, nothing any of the naysayers say will change my views.

I'm out. As I said, nothing any of the naysayers say will change my views.

Lol. Bye.

You think trafficking humans is fine and dandy.

And that babies can be bought.

The very idea that a child born to a surrogate and given to someone else at birth, (or people who are adopted,) will have a traumatic and devastating life, is utterly pathetic.

I'll go and tell my friend that shall I? How charming of you to discount her experiences because you support human babies being bought and sold as human commodities.

If you are a parent you will realise the life upheaval pre and obviously post baby arrival, it's a life changing choice that particularly for people unable to conceive naturally have done nothing but consider for the entirety of their adult lives. Women and men from the moment they are sexually active have to make decisions based on when they want to have children.
To then get to an age, a life stage or financial stability and be told it's never going to happen for you, has been devastating for them and as I have previously stated people have lost their lives from this.

I've said repeatedly on this thread, I'm an adopter. So you really don't need to lecture me on what it's like to be unable to have a birth child.

Surrogacy on the majority is humans helping other humans,

Surrogacy only considers the wants and wishes of the adults involved. It might be 'helping' the adult humans, but it gives no consideration to the best interests of the baby humans created for sale.

with every evolving scenerio there are people who exploit the only way to overcome this is to review, reform and protect constantly, which is what is happening.

No, it's not the only way. We could just say no, this isn't okay in a civilised society. Humans of any age aren't for sale, no matter how much someone wants one.

@DannyZukosSmile You know, you could engage with posters, answer questions that have been asked, discuss the ethic implications as we are all doing - but instead you seem to prone to histrionics (which is ironic considering how you speak of women with an alternative view).

I’ve asked so many times where the baby’s needs feature in surrogacy and I’m still none the wiser. I’d love to see some other studies or commentary dispelling the trauma of removing babies from birth mothers but that hasn’t been forthcoming either. I’d love to see the evidence of rich women carrying babies for poor women but I’ve seen that either. What I have seen instead is women discussing the issue thoughtfully and engaging with the problem at heart. None of what you’ve posted has that done that. So goodbye I guess?

I CBA to argue with them, because I find their views farcical and ludicrous, and nothing they say will make me think surrogacy is wrong. Nothing wrong with it. As a few posters have said, anyone who says a baby being 'taken' from its mother at 30 minutes old, who then goes on to be raised by non-biological parents, will be traumatized for life, are talking utter rot.

Please do share your research supporting your conclusion that it's 'utter rot' with the adoption community, so that the whole basis of modern adoption policy in the UK can be reformed to take into account this paradigm-shifting new evidence.

Yeah thought not.

Rich people buying all the upside, and outsourcing all the downside onto poor women. Women's rights have been going backwards for years, as have the rights and living standards of the poor. If surrogacy is a choice or an altruistic gift, how come we don't see rich Western European women having babies for people in Ukraine or Nepal?

I am honestly open to a discussion as stated I'm happy to have to my mind changed? Please tell me on what levels I am wrong on

No other opinion is allowed on mumsnet about surrogacy, other than it's vile and nasty.

Not sure about that. You have shared your opinion @DannyZukosSmile as have others who agree with you. I don't see any deleted posts from you or others but I haven't seen the full thread as yet.

As @CountZacular has pointed out, it is you who has failed to engage in good faith and with an approach that will change the hearts and minds of those who disagree with you. That's ok.

It might be that your view is outnumbered by others sharing their views (all welcome right?) and that is why you have reacted and posted

you are WRONG

I wonder if you responded to the consultation at the time but half of the respondents want a ban. Half. (See Nordic Model Now link up thread, you may have missed it and also missed the tweet from the surrogate mother who regretted it).

Reading the media articles on law reform I see the comments largely agree with the majority of posters here who reject surrogacy.

The OP has called for posters to email their MPs with their views and it doesn't matter who is right/wrong here. We all have different reasons for coming to our positions on surrogacy (though many overlap). If you want your views known by decision makers you should email your MP.
You have as much opportunity as others to do that and I would encourage you to.

Or you can continue to tell most of us here how we are wrong. That's fine.

Nobody is legally forced to keep a baby they are unwilling to look after.

I think the opposite. It’s a ridiculous comparison which is designed to shock but isn’t actually based in reality.
So called ‘pro lifers’ use the exact same line for abortion.
’oh so if it’s okay to have an abortion is it okay for me to murder this 5 year old? When does it become bad????’
It’s a tired out argument.

@CountZacular I’ve asked so many times where the baby’s needs feature in surrogacy and I’m still none the wiser.

Its a ridiculous question designed so the answer is never good enough for you.
Tell me, where do the needs of the potential baby feature when a couple decide to have unprotected sex? I’m still non the wise as to how they are thinking about the baby more.

They do luckily have the perk of being open minded which can't be said for everyone.

What's "open minded"about buying a human being?

@LakieLady - I'm so sorry. I can only imagine how dreadful that must be for you.

I don’t agree. The comparison to show the abhorrent nature of buying children. If you can buy a 1 day old baby, what about a 2 day old baby? Or 5 days old, a month…so on. At what age is it no longer acceptable to buy another human being?

‘Pro-lifers’ don’t have the interest of babies at the heart of their campaigning.

Clearly not your closed minded view of "buying a human being"

MN likes to go nuts about surrogacy, but it is the only option for some people who don't want to adopt

No, there’s another option. Don’t have a baby. They are not a human right.

Tell me, where do the needs of the potential baby feature when a couple decide to have unprotected sex? I’m still non the wise as to how they are thinking about the baby more.

FWIW I can answer that one @Albiboba

Broadly speaking as each child is different, and as this isn't an essay; a newborn needs his or her mother, food, clothing, cuddles and love.

As the child grows, the child would have a loving family with a primary carer to provide the same, with a secondary carer if possible, in a stable environment with l the material things they need (not necessarily want).

Later the child needs education, friendship, different experiences and as the child develops their own interests and becomes a teenager their education needs change so they have the opportunity to become a fully grown, well-rounded adult able to contribute to society and live a varied and interesting life which is fulfilling.

A child should know where he or she comes from in order to feel grounded, if early trauma took place they may need some kind of therapy or support.

I don't think this is a question asked in good faith but if it is, your answers will be found on Mumsnet as this is a forum primarily for parents, the vast majority of which are trying their best to do the best for their children and will have some detailed answers to the question, more than I can sum up here.

They do luckily have the perk of being open minded which can't be said for everyone.

What's "open minded"about buying a human being?

So open minded your brains have fallen out if you can't even see the ethical problems with it for the mother and for the child who get's no choice in the decisions of adults to purchase it as a commodity.

What’s the cut off? I’m not keen on toddler-hood. Can I pay someone expenses to raise my genetic child until age 3 and then take them for my own? Or does that look a bit more dodgy?

Is it because we don’t think babies have any sort of rights? But as a child gets older they do?

A child should know where he or she comes from in order to feel grounded, if early trauma took place they may need some kind of therapy or support.

I feel like screaming this from the rooftops. And I've said this already several times on here.

My friend had a wonderful upbringing with her adoptive parents. She still has a fundamental yearning to understand where she really came from, she has no history in her opinion. It starts with her adoptive parents. She is deeply traumatised despite a wonderful upbringing. It has affected her entire life.

@Albiboba I really don’t see why asking about the benefits to a baby in an artificial situation shouldn’t be discussed. We’ve heard repeatedly about the needs of the intended parents but the needs of that baby aren’t factored in at all.

Surrogacy takes a baby from the only person it’s ever known. That is traumatic. Whether there are lasting effects will be on an individual basis but there’s lots of information out there to say it does cause harm and that’s where discussions need to start. Not with who is commissioning the baby but with the needs of the baby first and foremost. Than with consideration of the surrogate whose body is being used for this. The commissioning parents need to be the last consideration but their needs are being putting first.

We are talking about human beings here - human children being bought and sold. Human woman being used as vessels. Let’s not forget that. it might sound dramatic but it’s the reality of the situation and it’s the discussion that needs to happen.

Clearly not your closed minded view of "buying a human being"

But that is what surrogacy is! Babies should not be items for sale, or gifts to be given to those who want them. They are actual people with their own interests.

Of course you can. You can pay someone to raise you child to 18 if you fancy it and most on here will support your right to do so.