To think that a surrogate mother...

[BackDownSouth]

Is the biological mother of a surrogate baby that she delivers, even in cases where another egg was used? One thing I hate hearing in the surrogacy debate by pro-surrogacy folks (who like to minimise the connection between mother and child and the effect that separation at birth can have on both) is “the surrogate has no biological relation to the baby” in cases where an egg other than the surrogate’s own were used. Of course she has a biological connection to the baby. She doesn’t have a GENETIC link to the baby - no. But biological? She has about as much of a biological connection with it as she would her own genetic child. The baby is quite literally made of her. The genetic material of the egg may predetermine baby’s genetic make-up to match that of the intended mother’s egg but that is such a shallow link compared to the nurturing happening during the pregnancy. It's the surrogate mother’s body building and nurturing that child. The mother’s body will likely forever retain snippets of the child’s DNA - particularly traces of Y chromosome if she carries a boy. Everything the mother does or eats or feels will influence that child. The baby knows her smell and voice and as soon as they are born they seek her, and they will feel stress at being placed into a stranger’s arms rather than mum’s immediately after birth. It’s completely ridiculous to say there is no biological connection between surrogate and baby. What’s more of a connection, really, to a newborn baby who has no concept of themselves other than the birth mother who is all they have ever known? Is the baby bothered about a mother who makes up half of their DNA but who has been on the other side of the world since their conception and is going to lay claim to them through a financial transaction? Or is the baby instead going to crave the presence of the woman who has grown and nurtured them? The surrogate is mum and the baby is going to need her post-birth no matter how much people want to ignore that.

People like to say “DNA is nothing” in the context of the love between step-parents and their stepchildren, adoptive children etc, and that’s rightly so. A genetic link isn’t what makes a family. But in the case of surrogacies, this is all completely thrown out of the window and the idea of a surrogate mother bonding with her baby (because it is her baby…) is inconceivable because she ‘isn’t even related to them’ despite literally creating and birthing the child.

But you are essentially saying that the perfectly happy 20 something in my example shouldn’t exist because you disagree with their origin…

Yes, that person should not have been created the way they were created.

Parents do not have a right to a child. As many have pointed out, the potential for harm is too great.

I honestly don’t know. I can see there is a ‘greater good’ argument for it (as I’ve already said several times) but I also see it as complicated given the situations where it brings life and joy. After tonight’s debate I’m very glad that it’s not a decision that’s up to me.

You don’t get extra points for happiness

at the end of the day they commissioned and procured a human being because they wanted their needs to trump every other aspect of the situation . They are not different from any number of individuals whose circumstances you might find less agreeable or ideal.

I disagree. The surrogate mother is the biological mother - the same meaning as you would have in adoption.

Surrogacy has borrowed the language of adoption.

A woman who donates the gamete is more like a ‘father’ in terms of her reproductive role. It’s would be more accurate and representative to call her the ‘female biological father’ than the biological mother.

You see, it’s exactly this that I have a problem with. No one should feel it is ok to tell another human they shouldn’t exist. Still less when that human is a happy early 20 year old going about their life who you have never met.

I’m baffled that you feel this is an ok judgement to pass.

Basically being ‘provider of a gamete’ is the father’s role in reproduction.

Providing the gamete is far lesser in importance in terms of being a mother than gestating and giving birth.

"Sue is a surrogate for a couple. Jane and Jim are the biological parents"

Jane and Jim may have provided their gametes but Jane did not grow the baby inside her womb got 9 months... Sue grew the baby in her body and formed a bond with the baby.

Do you have a link to that thread? Just curious to read it.

I have been consistent in pointing out the ethics of the situation.

What other unethical situation should be allowed for because according to a random person all the parties in one transaction were happy ?

No one should feel it is ok to tell another human they shouldn’t exist.

Just because I do not agree with how a person was created does not mean that I wish to kill them now

This thread I mean. The gender selection one. Please. 😊

I remember reading quite a moving pro ‘right to choose abortion’ article and the writer basically said, that although she didn’t hate her life, she thought her mum would have had a better life if she’d had an abortion, and of course she herself would be none the wiser, since she wouldn’t exist.

Okey dokey

I am very uncomfortable with surrogacy. If everyone has the right to a child then where are the women who are acting as surrogates for poor infertile women who cannot afford to pay for surrogacy.

I think one of my main problems with it is that it makes having a child a commercial transaction. As other pps have said, if surrogacy becomes more normalised what else will also become commonplace in the future? The article on a brain dead woman being used to gestate a baby was horrific but in theory scientific advances could make this more acceptable.

I just feel that surrogacy reduces women to breeding vessels and women's rights are precarious enough in the world today without adding that into the mix.

I agree that a child would have an unmet need that, perhaps, they couldn't put into words. My situ was very similar.

Please don't bash those who choose surrogacy. Most of them enter into it because they want a child to cherish. You make out that adoption is better. It is not. Many, many mothers were forced to give up their child- never to see them again. There are pros and cons in both cases. I would most definitely say that I'm searching for something that I'll never find.

But my 'parents' loved me a lot. They were not to know how I felt because I didn't tell them. In an ideal world every child would live with their bio parents. Every pregnancy would be a wanted one. Every father would stick around...

I’m not comfortable sharing it. It’s easy to find on a search. The clinic is in Cyprus. It was on the pregnancy board not AIBU .

In adoption though, the child is only taken from the mother, because it is in the baby’s best interests.

With surrogacy, the baby is taken from the mother, because none of the adults involved thought for one moment about what would be in the babies best interests. All they thought about was themselves and making themselves happy, so they chose to separate the baby from its mother.

I know in my early twenties I would have said that had my sister not been able to have DC I would have been a surrogate for her. We both have DC now and we parent VERY differently, to the point I often feel very sad for my nephews. Now I am older I also see that my sister is incredibly emotionally manipulative. Had I agreed to be a surrogate for her, I know I would have regretted it. But no way would I ever have felt comfortable saying that. I would be shunned not only by my sister but my full extended family. I wonder how many people who have gone through with surrogacy actually feel like that. This is where it is hard to say so and so is so happy with their decision because alot would never admit to anyone their regret.

I can’t fathom how anyone can hand over their baby to someone else to parent. You have no idea whether they’ll be good or bad. There’s nothing you can do to protect them once you’ve relinquished the child.

What's the process for living organ donors?

That would be the starting point. After all, those discussions (from the little I know) take place over a period of time, with risks and expectations discussed, independent counselling etc.

There needs to be a clear agreement about what happens if any of the adults change their mind for any of a range of potential reasons.

It may end up that there are very, very few people who decide to go down that route. That's fine.

But I don't think it is my right to tell another woman whether she should or should not undergo a pregnancy.

Nor do I think separating a baby from their biological mother in itself does irreparable harm.

Therefore I don't support a complete ban on surrogacy.

The Julie Bindel article I linked upthread mentioned that many altruistic surrogates told their stories about how their relationships deteriorated with the people they were a surrogate for. And how their views changed as they got older and realised many of the issues.

And as I keep mentioning, how is the type of emotional coercion or exploitation going to be uncovered under the system that some people believe will work. When so much of the time it is only when we are much older that we recognise the coercion that may be in our family relationships. Or that we cannot admit that coercive power imbalance to ourselves to even be picked up by someone else?

In adoption though, the child is only taken from the mother, because it is in the baby’s best interests.

Disagree. If the mother was given more support it would be in the baby's interest to stay put.

As I have mentioned, there have been many, many dodgy adoptions that would not hold water today. Not to mention mothers of multiples whose babies were given to different homes, so didn't even get the chance to grow up together. And, objectively, adoption is also selfish. You're still hand-picking a child of your preference. And some adoptions have fallen through when the child is not the desired fit for the family.

Not having biological 'privilege' but receiving Unconditional Love is priceless. I am in no doubt that my parents loved me in the best way they could. My situation was not ideal but to know that I was always loved in a blessing.

Finley Biden would still be alive if the courts had decided not to continue to support his mother in being a better parent and had him adopted instead.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/apr/14/chesterfield-couple-finley-boden-verdict

Blimey - I didn't realise that living donation to someone you don't know took place so often ('often' being relative!) Donating a kidney to someone you don't know - NHS Organ Donation

Yes, the Constance Marten/Mark Gordon threads had people saying 'all a baby needs is its mother'.

And adoptive parents don't 'hand pick' a child of their 'preference'. They do have to consider very carefully what needs they can parent, over and above the usual needs of any child. Some of which needs have been created by the actions of the biological parents.