Made in Chelsea blokes - twins via surrogate

[HermioneKipper]

More “celebs” commissioning a woman’s body to buy a baby.

When is this going to be made illegal 😡

And twins again. So many of them have twins. I think I get a bit triggered by this especially as I have twins and know how dangerous twin pregnancy can be for both mother and babies. And what it does to a woman’s body. No one could consent to this.

Had to switch off Giovanna Fletcher and her simpering podcast when they started talking about “their” miscarriages. Horrific amounts of bleeding, pain and horrendous wrenching emotional pain for you was it mates? No, didn’t think so.

Did anyone answer @thebellagio ’s very sensible question?

Multiple people. Read the thread.

but Jesus if you need the difference spelt out to you ….

@AngryBirdsNoMore

Yes a number of us answered her question.

Here was my answer, there are others all explaining the same distinction(s) between adoption and surrogacy:

Adoption occurs to place an existing child in need with adoptive parents. It is a child centred process.

Surrogacy occurs to create a child on demand. It is an adult centred process.

They are completely different, I find it a little hard to grasp someone not understanding that but I've answered in good faith assuming you really didn't see the huge difference between them.

FWIW I'm adopted.

Really interesting post! Never thought of it like that. Yes why can a woman consent to pregnancy of twins if she’s keeping the twins but not if she isn’t?

It’s completely different when it’s your own baby FFS.

Women acting as surrogates are being treated as vessels being paid for the use of their body.

I am not the one treating her as a body in this scenario.

And I highly doubt she knew the full risks to her health with a twin pregnancy. No one can.

it can’t and shouldn’t be able to be consented to.

Because they’re her own babies FFS.

Shes not being paid to give them to some rich “commissioning parents”

Me too, surrogacy is abhorrent.

How does that change consent?

@dailytalk - an act of love? For who? Not for the child.

In surrogacy, a child has been created in order to be removed from its mother in order to satisfy an adult's wants. It's abhorrent in a civilised society. It's banned in most of Europe for good reason

OP - what if it was not the surrogate egg that was used? Then the baby is not hers in anyway biologically speaking, she carried it yes but it is not her child. What’s your opinion then?

Surrogacy is the only way for some people to have their own biological children - I do frown upon celebrities who have their children via surrogate if they’re able to have their own children naturally but fundamentally I believe that as long as a child is loved, healthy, happy, safe and provided for and the surrogate is doing this of her own free will, then really it’s none of yours, or anyone else’s business.

For the posters saying a child needs it’s mother, even with a typical family set up this isn’t guaranteed, death, illness, divorce, poor relationships etc all can mean a child only has one parent or one present parent.

Why do people always compare it to puppies and kittens staying with their mum for 8 weeks

Ever hand reared a baby animal? No one wants to be bottle feeding, washing and stimulating their puppies/kittens so they can go to the loo every 2 hours day and night until they are weaned 🙄

I think I struggle with surrogacy because I don't think having children is a 'right'. You're not entitled to rent a womb and buy a baby, you don't have a right to become a parent, especially if you have to endanger the life/health of a woman in the process. Having children is a privilege.

I'm fine with any medical procedure that involves your own body, as you're not involving a third party or endangering anyone else for your own wants/desires.

For those who say 'the surrogate wants to'... Well if you were offering someone a lot of money for their kidney, and they offer it to you for that price, it's still unethical to take it, even though they 'want to give you it'. Surrogacy is very exploitative of women, and a very slippery slope IMO.

First, not all miscarriages are physically difficult. I’ve had lots.
Miscarriages are just as emotionally difficult for both parents, aside from hormonal changes in the mother (which again, doesn’t happen all the time - I’ve had this in less than half my miscarriages)

If my best friend or sister could not carry to term; I’d be a surrogate for them in a heartbeat. No money would change hands.

Also, it’s a fallacy that the MOTHER needs to be the one to provide the newborns needs in the early days. If a child only has its mum provide care in the early days, then of course the baby will naturally prefer their mother. However; that care provider could just as easily be the father. There are studies which back this up. Anecdotally; both my children were easily settled by either me or my partner in the first weeks and months of life.

This with bells on. Children in the care system are not ready waiting replacements for people who aren't able to have their own children for whatever the reason and its deeply unfair to promote this as an easy throwaway alternative. This attitude also encourages the type of adoption system present through private adoption where people with minimal training and vetting can pay huge amounts to buy a child who has been through trauma.

Plus the main issue I have with surrogacy is the effect on attachment it can have for the child. This same issue is inherently part of adoption. In terms of what women do with their bodies, I don't have a problem with surrogacy provided the woman is financially stable to begin with and contracts are drawn up ethically - I do think some women are in a position to consensually act as surrogate. I do think it isn't ideal for the child in question though.

The whole "just expenses" thing is also so open to abuse here. I know a gay couple who openly told me they paid their surrogate £20k expenses + legals, here in the UK approx 7 years ago. Now I don't know about you but I certainly didn't incur £20k of expenses on me when pregnant.

Indeed they should not have children, unless they are committed to adoption or fostering. They should not be able to rent a surrogate in exactly the same way as m/f couples should not be able to rent a surrogate.

You worked every day? £20k is far too little,

I find people like you who sanitise human trafficking under the name of surrogacy much more sickening.

In the uk if if comes out of your vagina it's your legally and your husbands..... despite a doctor putting in say for comedy's sake a gay man's sperm who's from China and a donated egg from an African lady.... The white last that's just given birth to a mixed race black African and East Asian child, legally is the mother and her husband.

I frankly don't see surrogacy as a problem if the woman carrying the baby is happy to do it.

Sounds like your hatred has some subconscious roots in jealousy tbh.

Because there are thousands of women in developing countries, including Ukraine, who do it for money. If they lose their life in childbirth, is that ok?

I think there is also the other aspect that anyone can pay for a child if they have the money.... and a lot of people are uncomfortable with gay men and lesbian women doing it. Twenty years ago it wasn't a thing, now it is.

Family and society is changing that we are becoming so disconnected with what is biological and what science can create.

Men will be implanted with cervix's before long and bleeding.

I find it bizarre that people like the Kardashian's and Paris Hilton have made it more fashionable.

I'm trying to be kind but in a world where we call people "they" because they don't feel like a man or women.... I'm really struggling.

Gay couples can have children any way they like.

Really @Jazsimone ?

Can they head to a developing country with a wad of cash, wander the streets until they see a cute baby, buy it from the very poor mother?

If not, why not? The mother is consenting, it's just post-birth surrogacy right? Is this a homophobic position?

If yes, how about I start a business which makes it easier for those couples. I'll go around the world and buy cute babies from their poor mothers. Infertile couples can browse my website, and arrange to buy the ones they like. Everyone's consenting. To say this is unethical would be homophobic, right?

Oh I’m pretty sure you do