To tell you surrogacy is going to be liberalised thread 2

[VestaTilley]

Hi everyone,

My original thread has run to 950 odd posts and 38 pages, so starting a new one. Thank you to all who have posted.

For those who didn’t see thread 1: the Law Commission are proposing to liberalise surrogacy laws in this country and make the commissioning parents - not the birth mother - the legal parents from birth.

I believe there are inherent problems with surrogacy and that it is a misogynistic and unethical practice. If you agree, please email your MP today and ask them to make representations to the PM and Health and Equalities Secretary against the new Bill.

https://www.lawcom.gov.uk/surrogacy-laws-to-be-overhauled-under-new-reforms-benefitting-the-child-surrogate-and-intended-parents/

Thanks for the new thread! Will continue to read with interest/disgust...

Thank you for the new thread Vesta

Thanks for new thread Vesta

Thanks for the new thread

No worries all! Am assuming the old one is now maxed out. I’ll be back tomorrow. Currently wrecked after DS’ birthday party 😂

Nordic Model Now have published their guidance to getting in touch with your MP

https://nmnow.org/supportwomen/finddyourmp

Just adding this link too that @FannyCann helpfully added in the last thread.

StopSurrogacyNowUK: stopsurrogacynowuk.org/

It includes template letters to send to your MP.

This is a better link (sorry I didn't see the post 🙈)

The template letter is very good imo as it speaks to the humanity of women, and the realities of pregnancy and childbirth.

It's a big topic and with a huge report and draft bill it can get overwhelming and difficult to focus on key issues. I think for MPs who haven't really thought about it much and for people generally who have been fed a diet of fluffy feel good stories via the media it's important to take a look at the other side to start thinking more deeply about the issues.

There are quite a few reasons why I oppose surrogacy but number one is that I feel so furious that this is something only women do, women are coached/expected to be kind and share the love. Who is being kind and thinking about what women go through to do this?
There's a podcast I have posted elsewhere featuring an Irish woman who was told at age 17 by her gynaecologist that she would never be able to have a baby. She didn't go into the reason but it would seem to be some congenital disorder. Anyway in the next breath the gynae (I think a female one) asked "have you any sisters?" before saying (I paraphrase) "well that's all right then, you can still have babies".

It filled me with rage. The nerve. How dare that woman assume the sisters will do this? I'll find the link and post it somewhere.
I have two daughters, as it happens neither of them show much likelihood of ever considering this level of a kindness to each other 😅 but I have told them under no circumstances to ask or to offer. A loving friend or sister wouldn't want to put their sibling/best friend at risk of harm in this way (including emotional harm). Don't tell me women aren't emotionally coerced within families to do this.

I posted this towards the end of the last thread so it may have been missed, I was wondering if @Markasread would be able to respond?

But to take away PR automatically diminishes their power straight after delivery. This is not usually an issue - in the overwhelming majority of cases, the hours post birth are what the surrogate has done the entire pregnancy to see. They have the opportunity to witness the family they've created and it's a very special time. Once they've done that, they want to go back to their own families. They don't want to do any baby care whatever - I have never heard of or met anyone who does. However rarely surrogates find that there is an issue in the relationship between themselves and the ips. This doesn't mean they don't want to hand the baby over or necessarily that they regret the surrogacy. They really don't want to be in a position, in that rare outcome, where they feel like ips can just walk out of the room with the baby. They want the power to hand the baby over themselves when they feel ready to do so. It may sound like a small thing but the there is nothing a surrogate would hate more than not being in control of the timings post birth in the event that the relationship had become tense. The only thing they'd hate more would be the ips not turning up to collect the baby - hence the push for PR from birth for IPs.

So surrogates (if we assume they all feel the same) simultaneously want to retain PR and control the handover, and want the purchasers to have PR so they can't refuse the baby once it's born?

That makes no sense to me - if the purchasers have PR from birth, the surrogate will not then have control over the handover - the purchasers have PR, they can take the baby whenever they like. If that is what surrogates want, it's not possible under the law as I understand it - you have PR or you don't. If the purchasers have it, the surrogate cannot control the handover.

Here is media coverage on this to start us off on the right foot.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/apr/02/child-best-interests-not-desires-of-adults-should-be-at-heart-of-surrogacy

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/4535801e-cd70-11ed-adc8-dcfa63cb4163?shareToken=0c8a5360b7af820b8a23f630904c72b9

news.sky.com/story/couples-could-become-legal-parents-of-surrogate-babies-at-birth-under-new-proposals-12844591

As much of the ethical issues have already been discussed on thread 1, I'm going to try to stick to the content of the proposals and not get too distracted by pro-surrogacy lobbyists or those who are invested in the surrogacy industry and come with an agenda, but, as I said on the last thread, I welcome their thoughts on this as much as anyone else's.

I support surrogacy as an option so thanks for the info so I know who to write to express my support for the changes.

Is it too hard to use google to find your MP? @lljkk

The last couple of paragraphs are fixed and can't be changed so if you use the template even if you cut and paste the final message will be to oppose the measures.
But do go ahead and add your voice to those who oppose the proposals.

I came here looking for this, glad to see the template has already been posted.

It’s so frustrating that news paper articles are stating that the surrogate could refuse consent up until the birth. This isn’t actually true, the bill states to withdraw consent the surrogate would need to do this via notifying the Regulated Surrogacy Organisation and one of the intended parents. If she decided 5 minutes before birth then how would this happen? What evidence would be necessary that both had been notified? Would read receipts be ok? A sent email? Would it need a bailiff to service papers like in other courts proceedings? The bill also states that unlike now where a surrogate must consent to the parental order the reform would give the judge to order without the surrogates consent. So even if consent was withdrawn the judge could still order it anyway 🤷‍♀️

The current system gives the surrogate 6 weeks before she can consent to the parental order, anoke time to consider things after the birth and if she doesn’t consent a parental order can’t be issued by a judge!

Yes the proposed measures are very punitive (to the surrogate mother) @Equalitea

Currently the Parental Order hinges on consent from the SM who must give her consent freely and unconditionally.

This is why the parental Order was overturned in a groundbreaking recent case as the SM gave her consent conditionally on the basis of a contact order (which was then ignored by the CPs).

If the court will have the right to award a PO without the consent of the surrogate mother why bother asking? Just deliver the baby and the paperwork and it's a done deal.

It's also worth remembering that in the UK about 1/3 of surrogacy is using the SM's own eggs - so called "traditional" surrogacy. It seems SM's like it as they can just have artificial insemination in a clinic or do DIY insemination at home and don't have to go through IVF and hormone injections etc. I assume CPs like it as it is a lot cheaper without buying eggs and paying for IVF. So these women are the mother in EVERY way, by birth and genetics. Literally handing over their own baby. Many of these mothers do want loose ongoing contact - honoured family friend status sort of thing with occasional meet ups and it appears to work well in quite a few cases - hence the posters who come here to say what a lovely thing it was to do and how happy they all are. There's lots of evidence that this works well for the child who knows where they came from and sees there mother as part of the extended family.

But when CP's try to take ownership, bully the SM and refuse contact then problems arise as happened in the court case where the SM has had the PO overturned.

I think this needs recognising - it's not on to override the mother and dish out a PO without her consent.

I think the type of woman who enthuses about the joy of giving the gift of life will get a nasty shock when she finds that CPs are exerting their rights and taking control, and assuming ownership of the baby from long before it is born. We can expect to see more sorry stories but the odds will be stacked against them should they go to court.

Emailed my MP, haven't had a response yet but I'm hoping to book to go and see him later this month.

Do post if you have had a response from your MP, it will be interesting to see what they have to say.
A lot of labour MPs support surrogacy, at least in public, due to having one of their number (Liz Kendall) obtain a baby via surrogacy. I imagine she will be in favour of the proposals and doing her but to support them.

This provides some testimonials of surrogate mothers (and the families they leave behind in death).

A truly tragic catelogue. The last thread had some anecdotes from women who had been surrogate mothers who had regret in different ways but this brings together a list which shared some horrors of how women as surrogate mothers can be treated.

These are US stories but their experiences are still relevant to the U.K. with the concept of a 'breeder class' and the element of control of the commissioning parents. Once you have a baby inside your body that 'belongs' to someone else the dynamic changes, the money is a catalyst.

www.legalizesurrogacywhynot.com/stories

Thank you for the second thread , Vesta

I haven't even had the courtesy of an acknowledgement of my e-mail from my MP (female, Labour).

She's a waste of space on many issues - either fobs off with a generalised reply and ignores specific questions, or ignores the e-mails altogether. Never gets into a discussion.

Just reading these now - this one in particular is chilling.

Would help if I attached the link . . .

https://www.legalizesurrogacywhynot.com/melissa-cook-story

JFC. What a nightmare. Not sure I’d’ve agreed to give (sell) a baby to a single deaf man though. Those poor, poor kids.

Nor I, @MavisMcMinty - I think she was wrong to do so, but for the judge to compound that wrong by surrendering the babies to such an unfit father (in fact, the surrogacy agency shouldn't have accepted him) was appalling. Surely he could have used the fact that the "father" had wanted them aborted, and had failed to pay what he was contracted to pay, to allow them to stay with their mother? It's disgusting - these are children, not random Amazon parcels.

I'm worrying about those babies now, and I don't know them.

BTW - those people who are reading this and haven't read the account - it isn't his deafness that makes him unfit. There is a whole lot more to the situation which is more than worrying. Those poor babies.