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

No I just genuinely don't understand the differences in opinion, it seems like cognitive dissonance to me but maybe I'm missing something, I was genuinely curious why one is so much more widely condemned than the other.

But it's the woman's (surrogates) choice. If it's her body it's up to her isn't it?

No one is allowed to to "whatever they like" with their own bodies... be they female or male.
Is it anti-feminist to have laws preventing women (and men) from selling their organs?

Quite. If surrogacy is so great then how come rich celebs never do it for others?

It's because she's prone to miscarriages

As someone else said earlier, perhaps I’ll feel a bit better about this ‘choice’ when rich white women also see being a surrogate as a ‘choice’.

@Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g That's monstrous.

There really are no words.

Well I suppose it depends if the baby is “ripped” away or not. I was reading an article a few months back and the surrogate said the first skin to skin was with the mother she was a surrogate for.

Like anything there’s a place for surrogacy, not sure for “celebrities” is that place though. I also have no idea who Chrissy Tiegen is.

Whilst physical force is not involved, the mothers choice is constrained by many things and arguably not a freely made choice.

More countries should follow Swedens lead and ban commercial and altruistic surrogacy as both are exploitative practices.

This still doesnt make surrogacy anything like adoption. But if you want to change the question, I'm happy to share my view.

You're kidding yourself if you think surrogacy happens from choice 99% of the time. There's ALWAYS a external driver other than being 'nice' to rich people - there's even been implied pressure if it's a family member doing it entirely free.

For most, it's business, and even that 1% of your 'doing it through choice' surrogates are enabling the 99% doing it because of pressure/money/coercion/emotional issues.

Remember those destitute people in the third world selling their kidneys? It's a branch of the same tree - body parts as consumables to be purchased.

And that's without even touching on the babies and their rights.

Have you read her statement about it on Instagram?

All her kids are ivf anyway due to fertility issues. She went through a horrific miscarriage. Was too frightened initially to try again so arranged the surrogate. Then felt she wanted to give a try herself when she was feeling more able.

She got pregnant, the surrogate still wished to go ahead and so she did.

It was the surrogate’s choice to do so. Not forced.

I personally think this is fine where there are health/advancing age issues. Provided the surrogate is happy to and is compensated for their time and the physical effort of growing the baby.

Where the woman is healthy and young that’s another matter.

For me I wouldn’t want it as the surrogate can influence gene expression and development which can have life long consequences.

But it isn’t about a woman deciding what to do with her own body is it, she is creating another body, the baby. Does her right of what to do with her own body extend to her also having rights over that body once it has left her body and is an independent human being, breathing and surviving without her placenta ? Does she have the right to sell that human being just because she has carried it in her body? Would a sperm donor also be able to claim that he had the right to sell a baby or give it away because he had donated half its genetic makeup.

Selling human beings is what this is about, no matter how you dress it up by minimising and fudging the language, calling it altruistic, saying the women have free choice, saying the baby will have a ‘better’ life etc etc . It is taking a human being and selling it. We don’t tolerate selling older children or adults, we rightly call it slavery, abuse, exploitation and human trafficking, why is it seen as acceptable to do to babies?

I know just plain grabby!!! And look what it’s done to Khloe Kardashian now?! Another one who thought it’d make things easier! No two ways about it pregnancy is tough I’m 36 weeks gallbladder infected to feck and could just cry most days!

But even through this pain and struggles and regardless of finances I couldn’t request a surrogate despite this! My exception for surrogacy are women who cannot carry at all multiple losses trying too etc!

Regardless of anything else, surely it just should not be legal to buy and sell babies?

The financial positions of the buyer and seller, the baby's genetic makeup etc aside - I feel like buying people is just a red line that can't be crossed?

Agree - surrogacy is a form of trafficking and should be illegal.

@Babsexxx sorry about the gallbladder, pain is far worse than childbirth, hope you get it removed asap after baby born 💐

But no one gets pregnant with the sole intention of a termination ...

Exactly. Lots of celebs are really pro surrogacy...and yet we don't see any of them being the surrogate? (Many have had children previously)
The Kardashians have used surrogates, considering there are several pro surrogacy sisters of child bearing age, none wanted to do it...?

And adoption is usually the least worst option for the child although newborn adoption I believe is fairly rare, and would only happen in very extreme circumstances. You only have to look at long lost families to see that many adopted people do have a yearning to find their birth parents even when they've been brought up by loving and caring families

If you support the “choice” argument for surrogacy do you also support it for organ donation? I mean why shouldn’t poor people also have the choice to sell their organs for profit? I don’t see how one is ok because no one has a gun to her head and one isn’t?

Because ultimately we need our organs.

I agree - I didn't even know that people were so hateful and despising of surrogacy until these threads started popping up.

Let people live their lives.

I’m going to assume lilyrosemay you’re aware that surrogacy carries a risk of infertility, incontinence, lifelong physical (and emotional) pain, depression, haemorrhage, heck even death. You still ok with it?

No one operates in a vacuum. The choices other women make about what to do with their bodies affects us all, to some degree. Other women are free to make different choices to me, but equally I'm free to find the consequences of their choices problematic. Not everything a woman does automatically becomes a feminist act just because it's a woman doing it.

Surrogacy (along with prostitution) reduces the female body to a commodity to be rented, be that for nine months for pregnancy or half an hour for a shag. It reinforces the power imbalance between rich and poor, with women in poverty routinely exploited. It places adults' wants over children's needs.

There is nothing 'feminist' about surrogacy, no matter how much choosy-choice libfems might want to argue otherwise.

I’m with you OP.

Sorry but this just isn’t true. People who adopt want a child the same way someone who carries one biologically wants a child. Otherwise they wouldn’t do it in the first place.