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

But arguably she is not the biological mother, Chrissy and John are the biological parents. And she chose to do this. She is not some poor third world human trafficked woman forced into surrogacy.

again it comes back to womens choices. She has the right to chose to do this with her body, no matter how many others disagree with her choices.

@HermioneKipper no matter how many times you write in capital letters, you're still wrong.

Why is it so hard to accept that some women will chose to give the gift of bearing a child to another woman, like some men donate soerm or women eggs? As said she isn’t some poverty stricken desperate woman.

Its interesting the opinions on here, on another thread about egg donation it was mostly the opposite, that egg donor mums were just carriers, no real connection, etc, etc.

Both are perfectly acceptable , I mean your point about breast feeding, it was normal in the past, Christ, women have been wet nursing babies for thousands of years!

@ChChocolatelover3 I think the difference is that adoption is making the very bestbof a terrible situation and giving a child love and stability when they otherwise would not have it. Surrogacy is taking a baby away from their mother and disrupting their primal instincts to be with the person / voice/ smell they have known for 9 months. Surrogacy is certainly worse in the case of men who do it. Men just cannot understand what it means to be a mum. At least Chrissy has had children of her own so does understand what the baby will need.
To be honest, I wasn't against surrogacy until I had my own baby and then I realised the primal needs of both the child and the mother. It's about more than just feeding and winding and cuddles.

I have every sympathy for woman that can have children, having faced that possibility myself it was heartbreaking. However when you already have 3 healthy children it seems immoral to pay someone to bring a 4th into this world.
I worry about the size of our population. There is now no restriction on everyone having more and more babies if you are rich enough to pay for them. If nature says you can't have babies maybe we should listen?

There was a thread the other day where the majority thought it was OK for a woman to abort at 40 weeks, and yet a woman giving away a baby.....at 40 weeks....is not OK? 🤔

Every society places limits on what we may choose to do with our own bodies, to protect the vulnerable who may make bad choices, amongst other reasons. This is why in the UK we don't allow children to have piercings, we don't allow surgeons to amputate limbs on request from someone suffering body dysmorphia, we don't allow people to sell their own organs for transplant, we don't currently allow euthanasia and we have legal constraints around surrogacy to try to stop it turning into a commercial business as it has in the US and some other countries.

Its 'wrong' to deliberately create a baby to be taken immediately to a family who will love that child, but OK to deliberately create a child for crack head, abusive parents, who will condem that child to a life of misery or worse?

OK....

I am struggling to understand your position here. You seem to be suggesting that removing a child from its family because someone else wants it is morally equivalent to removing it from its family because it is being abused.

Unless you're just whatabouting about people having kids when they're not realistically able to cope with them - which is (debatably) not OK, but is a whole other thread and has no relevance to whether surrogacy is OK or not.

YNBU from me. I'm against surrogacy full stop. Baby factories in Ukraine, Nigeria and Asia, where women are virtually imprisoned while they gestate babies. It's just another way to make money from women and children. No follow-up to what's happening to those children or the women who bear them.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/15/the-stranded-babies-of-kyiv-and-the-women-who-give-birth-for-money

Chrissy is vile, I don’t know how she still gets air time given that she repeatedly encouraged a 16 year old to kill herself. This appears to have been glossed over.

However why is it ok to completely ride roughshod over the right of a surrogate to have a child for someone else? The surrogate was not from a developing country and presumably well compensated? If surrogacy is unacceptable, why is egg donation then ok? Or isn’t it? And how does any of this affect you in the slightest?

Deary me.....

But she isn't the mother though, is she OP?

She is the gestational carrier. Huge difference.

This to me is the biggest issue here. We have the idea of’fathering’ a child because ending a parenting role at conception is physically possible for men, but no comparable term for women. ‘Mothering’ happens after birth not before. Breaking down the pregnancy/birth/mother role into parts plays into the hands of those who exploit women. If she is ‘only’ the ‘carrier’ does that mean that women who carry babies they intend to raise conceived through donor eggs are ‘only’ carriers? Do they have legal rights over their babies or could the father or donor claim that role? What part is played in making a baby by the bond that is established in the womb? Or the antibodies that cross the placenta and prepare the baby for life outside the womb. What about the way that babies orientate to the heartbeat of their ‘carriers’ and the role that skin contact has in the days after birth. Pregnancy is not just about a womb! Dehumanising women starts by breaking them into parts (womb haver, carrier, egg donor). Men’s bodies are never subjected to this.

Oh, I see abortion's been rolled out as a diversionary tactic.

Bodily autonomy and freedom of choice for women is apparently only acceptable on here in limited circumstances.

@MrsPelligrinoPetrichor you summed it up perfectly. "Adoption is child focused and surrogacy is about what adults want."

I've always been very relaxed about surrogacy, particularly within countries like the US/UK as I've never bought into this argument about people being co-erced, but gosh even I paused when I read about this yesterday. It feels greedy to do this, it made me very uncomfortable. I don't know why, but the fact that she did this just because she'd always wanted 4 children since she was a child feels ridiculous and childish. We all thought our lives would look a certain way as children, but sometimes life doesn't work out like that. It's immensely, grossly privileged to use a surrogate for a purpose like this when you have carried and birthed 3 babies. It's made me rethink all my views on this, actually.

It also made me feel sorry for her children, as I can't imagine how she will cope if they don't turn out exactly the way she imagined they would when she was playing babies at 6 years old.

I agree.

So surrogacy is OK for the rocky and famous because you deem they'll have a better life? I mean let's ignore how many kids of focus parents lives are screwed up by their parents fame and wealth....

Oh get a life!

However why is it ok to completely ride roughshod over the right of a surrogate to have a child for someone else?

What "right" is that? Why should she have that "right"? Should she have the "right" to negotiate the same contract (i.e. giving up the child to specific, non-vetted people for money) after birth? A year after birth? Ten years after birth?

The surrogate was not from a developing country and presumably well compensated?

Should you be allowed to sell your organs?

If surrogacy is unacceptable, why is egg donation then ok? Or isn’t it?

A different thread, but the most obvious difference is that egg donation does not involve taking a child from the mother with whom it has bonded in the womb.

And how does any of this affect you in the slightest?

You're right. Unless an ethical issue affects you personally, BACK OFF. Fighting against exploitation and injustice is never a good look. 🙄

How have you drawn this comparison?!

Surrogacy is a ordering a bespoke baby to be delivered for you, it's not adopting an unwanted child to prevent an abortion.

You rightly can’t buy an adult but you can happily buy a baby. #sickworld.

But that’s just not true. Lots of people do it for reasons that have nothing to do with money. You can’t talk about equality and feminism and then tell women they can’t decide what to do with their bodies because it doesn’t align with YOUR morals. That’s not feminism.

Bodily autonomy and freedom of choice for women is apparently only acceptable on here in limited circumstances.

Giving a child up for adoption as soon as it's born is not the same thing as deliberately getting pregnant in order to fulfil an order from someone else.

Because the vast, vast majority of women who are acting as surrogates are vulnerable women doing it for money. Baby factories run by criminals have become a big thing in poorer countries where women's rights count for nothing. Think about what happens to the children in these circumstances. These children for example, raised as a tribe by nannies to make a rich man happy.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-43123658