AIBU? 72 year old couple get parental rights for surrogate born baby

[OhHolyJesus]

There’s been a lot of coverage this week about this case that came before the UK family court.

A couple, both aged 72, commissioned a woman in California to have a baby for them, it seems to replace their adult son who died in his mid-twenties.

Though they say this new baby boy isn’t a replacement, they deliberately arranged for him to be born as he was conceived from a woman who donated her eggs (with all the risks that entails, and the likely payment) and the sperm of the commissioning father.

They didn’t share their plans with family but asked for friends of their adult son and a 52 year old niece in the family, to be guardians should (when?) they die.

The boy was 14 months old at the time of the court case last month so they embarked on this plan aged 70+ and no one lives forever. This toddler will likely see the deaths of one or both of his primary carers (though they have a full time nanny 5 days a week) by the time he reaches secondary school.

AIBU to think there should be age limits on surrogacy and 72 is too old?

<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20250527213411/www.thetimes.com/uk/healthcare/article/couple-in-seventies-win-right-to-be-parents-of-surrogate-baby-fxzxb83v2" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://web.archive.org/web/20250527213411/www.thetimes.com/uk/healthcare/article/couple-in-seventies-win-right-to-be-parents-of-surrogate-baby-fxzxb83v2

There is open adoption and DNA testing offers adopted adults and teenagers the chance to find their birth mother.

As surrogacy arrangements often includes the ‘use’ of a second (or third, or forth) woman as an egg donor, so any DNA search would potentially find a genetic mother, but not a birth mother.

I’m thinking of another international commercial surrogacy for two British women in their 60s and 70s who had two women from Ukraine have two babies for them who were egg donor conceived.

The surrogate mothers returned to Ukraine shortly after giving birth.

“The children were conceived from from the same woman’s eggs and the same man’s sperm so were related to each other but were not related to either of the two women, so the Parental Order was denied. Consent from the Ukrainian mothers was dispensed with.”

https://stopsurrogacynowuk.org/2025/03/22/buying-babies-from-abroad/

Totally against surrogacy - such exploitation. This couple are far too old, and they’ve missed their boat.

One of the cases there is of a single man using an overseas surrogate to create a baby.

Is no one concerned about why a single man wants to create a child? With no Mother?

I remember watching a programme, probably over three decades ago now, which had in depth interviews with several paedophiles. One talked about how he wanted a girlfriend and children. He said, ‘ I tell myself that I wouldn’t abuse them when they are my own children. But I know I will really.’ This man wanted children of his own to abuse.

Anyone with money and inclination can create children to raise with no background checks or investigation into their suitability as parents, or their motivation. This should not be allowed.

Even in the case of, say, a woman having a baby for her sister who cannot have a baby for medical reasons?

How could the hospital refuse to allow it when presented with a pregnant woman? Should they have refused to help her or insisted she terminate the pregnancy?

Yes.

There should be 0 grey areas here, because as soon as you allow it for one others slip through the net.

I also disagree with surrogacy. If someone wants a child but for medical reasons can't have one themselves, then that's sad but there are children waiting to be adopted.

Also yes.

The child has been created to loose its birth mother. We don’t do that to puppies.

Donor eggs. There have been many cases of post menopausal women using IVF to get pregnant,e.g Patricia Rashbrook who gave birth at 63, the German 65 year old mother of 13 who had quads, a 73 year old Indian woman, the oldest woman ever to give birth, and a Spanish woman who had twins aged 66 and died of cancer two and a half years later. Tbh I think it’s almost as unethical as surrogacy.

I assume that she means the clinic that facilitated the pregnancy in the first place. But of course that is in California so there is nothing we can do. The courts are being presented with situations that shouldn’t happen here but then get rubber stamped once the baby is here. Whatever regulations are put in place here can be undercut by going abroad.

Meant to add, the Spanish woman had lied to a US clinic to get treatment, but her egg donor was 18 years old. How many mothers of daughters here would be happy for them to undergo egg donation at that age?

Agree with this in every way. Surrogacy is never okay and buying babies is never okay.

What about 88 year old sperm. Can't imagine it's very motile unless he froze it as a younger man. Masturbation is a sin in orthodox judaism though there must be an exception for fertility treatment as its free in Israel for first 2 live pregnancies under public health insurance and I understand it's used across the whole spectrum of society as children are so treasured and being orthodox and infertile is particularly punishing. But being so proactive with sperm freezing is another thing...

SO many things wrong with this:

The absolute evil of surrogacy itself: creating a baby to have it removed from its mother at birth and the exploitation of a woman to do that.

Egg buying: This baby is some woman's biological child and if done in the US, the baby has no rights to know his mother (ditto know its birth mother). Siblings, extended family, etc. are purposely kept from baby.

Pure selfishness of parents: I know they lost their only son from cancer. that is heartbreaking, but the answer to heartbreak is not to cause pain and suffering of others. This child is being raised with the potential to have ZERO parents in his/her life based on the circumstances and his commissioning parents' ages (no birth mother, no biological/DNA mother, no father, no adoptive mother)

Psychological issues: As much as the parents protest, this child was most most definitely created to fill a missing hole from the death of their first child. He will always know he was created in the shadow of his older brother.

Biological risks: Age of father's sperm and the fact their other son had cancer quite young. Not the best circumstances for a healthy child.

(poorer) Women's bodies... of course their wombs should be for rent for richer people.

YANBU.

Surrogacy is exploitation.

The motives of the 'parents' are all wrong - selfish, self centered, horrifying.

The best interests of the child at the centre of this have been completely overlooked by all parties involved in the debacle. No surprises there though.

Surrogacy is fucking disgusting - couldn’t give a damn about the age or sex, or interpersonal relationships of whomever is commissioning it. Using a woman’s body in this way for cash is repugnant

I’m totally against quoting the entire OP

No one should be buying babies.

Yes. Babies aren't commodities.

Would you think I should be allowed to give a 2 year old to my sister, if she really wants one? Because that's illegal. Why is it legal to do stuff to newborns that is illegal to do to older children (or adults for that matter)?

Is it because we're pretending it's ok because the baby won't remember, and will be wanted and cared for? It's not ok to do stuff to people as long as they won't remember it and you'll be nice to them afterwards. And you can still be affected by things you can't remember.

There was no need to quote the whole OP.
Especially just to write that.

A 56 year old woman is infertile because she’s beyond natural childbearing age. Not because she has “fertility issues”. And yes about being orthodox and infertile, women have very little status in society unless they’ve reproduced, which is true of other religions as well.

This. This couple could give so much to a teen in need of a loving foster home. No baby will ever replace their DC that died. Hospitals should put an age cap on surrogacy. Even with a Nanny 5 days a week they will be exhausted. I met DH when I was 42 and he was 39 and we would have loved a baby but knew it would be unfair on the baby. Instead we have fostered DC. One dc we have fostered from age 5 years until now he is almost 19. It has been so rewarding seeing him have a stable family life and good opportunities in life. If I look after my DGC for a day or too I feel totally worn out now and I'm a lot younger than this pair. There is a reason women can't usually conceive naturally after about 42 years old. That should be the cut off point. I feel sorry for this poor baby who will likely be born to be orphaned in it's teens. How incredibly selfish they are.