Chrissy Teigen surrogacy

[HermioneKipper]

Just announced a 4th baby via a surrogate.

Its just so breathtakingly entitled to buy a woman’s body - especially when you already have 3 children?!

No regard for the safety of the surrogate’s body or thought for the baby who would be ripped from their mother at birth.

These people sicken me

I find the concept of surrogacy genuinely really upsetting. I had no real opinion on it either way until I saw a photo of a celeb couple (can’t remember who) holding their hours old baby that had been born via surrogate and you can see the baby rooting desperately for a nipple.

I found it really distressing - to think that baby will never know the primal comfort of its mother. I understand that babies can be separated from their birth mothers for all kinds of reasons but to see the smiling parents looking like they had won some kind of prize made me feel sick.

@Sissynova
At the first place the adoption process starts because there are children who needs families, whereas surrogacy process starts because an adult wants a baby.

Are you in the US? It's very different in the UK. Here, potential adoptive parents go through an extensive vetting procedure and if they pass that (not all do) specialist social workers try to match them with a suitable child, taking into account the parents' ethnicity, religion, ages, and so on. Not all adoptive parents get a match. The child is supposed to be absolutely central to the process.

Surrogacy seems to be the opposite. The 'commissioning' parents, i.e. the buyers, are the one calling the shots. No vetting process for them! This alone is worrying.

I was staggered by this. As someone whose been a strong advocate of womens rights, mainly abortion rights I believe, I was shocked to learn that she was happy to use another woman’s body just because it suited her. She even admitted in the IG post that it had taken its toll and hadn’t been plain sailing to and alluded to a dramatic birth. Although at least she has acknowledged the sacrifices the surrogate has made I suppose!

Apparently Kerry Katona is in talks! And let's face it, she loves her kids but she's not winning any parenting awards

Life isn't Tiktok or Instagram.
Many surrogate mothers and the babies aren't treated that well... for example some were left in "orphanages" for months when the commissioning parents during Covid.
Ukrainian surrogate mothers giving birth in bomb shelters
Babies being born disabled so they are abandoned

Women can have lifelong injuries from giving birth. They can even die.

Idk I guess I'm gonna wonder about the ethics from this thread

The bit I'm not getting though is some arguments being "they already have X amount of children"

Like if it's actually unethical in people's minds... why after X amount and not 0 children? No magic number of already existing children suddenly tips it from "understandable" to "unethical" surely?

One that doesn’t support human trafficking or treating women like a purchasable object, probably.

I’ve had two years of unexplained infertility. I’ve had three miscarriages that broke my heart each time. I don’t get a free pass at surrogacy because of these tragedies. It’s buying a woman’s body and risking her life. Surrogacy is akin to human trafficking. That poor baby being ripped from its birth mother and given to strangers to add to their collection. All to keep pushing her home cooking mom brand.

This surrogate seems to have done this through choice and personally I respect a woman’s choices. It’s not about whether I disagree or agree. It’s about her right to choose.

I don't oppose surrogacy in all its forms, but to have a 4th child via surrogate when you already have three seems completely ridiculous.

Sorry haven’t rtft so I’m sure others have made this point but she’s just given birth, so obviously wasn’t THAT scared of pregnancy again. There’s like a 5 month age gap between the two babies.

Second, no one should have the right to buy a baby full stop. It is morally wrong. If people were happy to sell their own organs and posting about it on TikTok would you be cheering them on? And if not, what do you see is the difference? People can happily live without a kidney but death and permanent disabilities are real risks of pregnancy and childbirth.

Correct.

But you might expect that a woman who has had children might be even more aware of the dangers and impact of pregnancy and exactly what they are demanding of the surrogate mother. That’s the only context that makes it very slightly worse for me.

@Lillyrosemay but what about the child?

I'm not as black and white about it as some on here.

For me there are two issues. The potential exploitation of the surrogate and the potential trauma for the baby in being removed from his or her birth mother.

On the first issue, I do accept that there are certain situations in which there is no exploitation and little risk, but they are few and far between. Even where it is an altruistic surrogacy and the surrogate mother really, genuinely wants to carry a baby for a couple she really cares about, there are still risks. What if the baby has a life limiting condition and the surrogate and the intended parents don't agree on whether she should terminate the pregnancy? What if the surrogate, having had previous uncomplicated pregnancies, ends up with a life threatening pregnancy complications, severe birth injuries or even dies in childbirth? How would you ever forgive yourself? But in the vast majority of cases I think there is clear exploitation and the surrogacy industry is really problematic. Even in the US where using a surrogate might cost you $250,000, the surrogate only gets around $40,000, which is really not a lot of money for what she is actually doing for the couple. Most of the price tag goes on medical bills and agency fees.

And then once you've normalised the idea that it's OK for a rich couple with €250,000 to spare to use a commercial surrogate because it's all been done properly and the surrogate hasn't been exploited, you normalise the idea that commercial surrogacy is OK among people who haven't got €250,000 to spare but think, "Why should this option only be available to super rich people like Chrissy Teigen and John Legend? I deserve to have a baby as much as they do. More so, actually, since they already had three. I can't afford to do it here but I can afford to go to Ukraine and do it there."

The second issue, about the impact on the baby, is just too unknowable. All we have is speculation really. Obviously I hope that all babies born to surrogates have wonderful childhoods with loving parents who went to extreme measures to have them, but who knows what the impact of being removed from their birth mother really is? It's not like adoption where they are being removed from their birth mother for their own welfare, and where they haven't been conceived for the purpose of being removed from their birth mother and raised by someone else.

Like I said, I'm not completely black and white about it and I would have some sympathy for, say, a woman born without a uterus who was desperate for her own baby and did everything she could to respect the welfare of both the surrogate and the baby. To me that's far less clear cut than celebrities who already have several children using a surrogate to have even more.

I disagree. Say my sister couldn't carry her own children and had none, and I volunteered to be her surrogate willing to take on the associated risks so she could have a child, then I think that's totally different.

The Surrogate knows exactly what they are getting. Into, they get paid well for it.

People who are against it are totally against it; there's no "It's ok if you've had a stillbirth/can't have children, but not if you already have 2 or 3"

Granted, some may have pointed out that the sleb in question already has children by way of response to those trying to justify it, but no one has said theres a point at which it switches from acceptable and ethical to the opposite.

It's always wrong, whatever the circumstances.

I'm not against surrogacy per se. But there is something which doesn't sit right with me, that rich people can buy a baby from a poor person and use that person's body to carry a baby for them. If it wasn't about money, and there was no payment involved, I would feel better about it

Yeah it’s grim. I always wanted a big family but medically cannot, it’s sad but it doesn’t give me the right to buy another woman’s body to use.

Isn't there research that shows that a pregnancy where the surrogate has no genetic connection to the baby is higher risk than one where it's her own egg?

I've been troubled in the past by reading on threads like this that some 'commissioning' parents have attempted to control the decision-making over any problems that may arise during the pregnancy or birth. This means they could be making life-altering decisions for the pregnant/birthing woman because she is not their priority, the baby is. Nobody should make those decisions except the woman herself, and if she's not able to (comatose, for example), it should be her next of kin deciding what to do in conjunction with doctors.

You don’t see many rich or famous people being surrogates

Safeguarding actions / laws do not depend on individual circumstances. They are put in place to protect those who are not "happy" with the situation. In surrogacy those affected beyond the happy surrogate and happy commissioning parents, are the baby, vulnerable women who can be coerced or forced by poverty into surrogacy and society as a whole especially women everywhere!

The process of surrogacy is transactional, even when done without money. Condoning surrogacy in any situation affects how women's bodies and reproductive systems are regarded. As well as ignoring the impact on the babies!

It gives a green light to using women's bodies for someone else's gain. If that's 'OK' in surrogacy what else will be ok in the future?

Individual women consenting doesn't mean it's an ethical.

Her son wasn’t stillborn. She had Q to have a medical termination as her life was at risk.

Why is it that people support adoption but hate surrogacy?

If you'd read any of the 'boring' threads that 'pop up' on MN you'd know.

Adoption is about finding a home for a child already in the world who cannot, for whatever reason, be with its biological parents. The needs of the child are paramount. The joy of the new parents is a by-product.

Surrogacy, particularly in its current form, is about creating a child to be removed from the closet physical connection it has, after paying a woman to put herself at significant physical risk, because two (almost always) wealthy adults want to. It's focussed on the joy of the commissioning parents - what is best for the child is a sideline.

One is a step to rectifying a child's existing trauma. One is taking a step to create it. One is helping living children, one is treating women like incubators for the wealthy and selling handing over babies in exchange for money. One is a financial transaction, the other is not.

Think what you will about the morals around surrogacy but it's worlds apart from adoption.