Another surrogacy experience

[WoolOfBat]

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9717991/The-British-couples-pay-40-000-child-Ukraines-hellish-baby-factory.html

How could it not occur to them that large scale baby sellers would be immoral?

I notice they grabbed the babies and ran. They didn’t refuse because of the terrible circumstances. They didn’t follow up the mother and check her welfare or give her extra cash for her troubles. They didn’t even report it at the time. What they did was sit on their arses for four years until it was far enough in the past that nobody was likely to take their babies away. THEN they decided to make a fuss. Like, they know this is terrible but they want to take advantage of it themselves and make sure they’re free and clear before they start telling everyone else it’s wrong and they shouldn’t do it.

I find these stories so hard to read. Heartbreaking. Utterly devastating. Who could do this to babies? Or the surrogate mothers?

Agree, elgreco, that I find it a bit surprising that someone wouldn't have considered the potential implications for effectively buying a baby to order. But very often surrogacy is presented as this miraculous, easy, positive-all-round process. Lots of Insta-happy stories about 'our wonderful surrogacy journey' etc.

While surrogacy is legal in the UK, the only payments allowed are expenses, i.e. those incurred as a result of the pregnancy, such as medical bills and compensation for time off work. Consequently, the number of UK women volunteering as surrogates is small which drives many couples abroad.

Ah, it's the British rules around buying children and exploitation that's to blame. Not this couple paying £40,000 for a guarantee of a baby.

The "guaranteed baby" is so horrendous, I can't imagine what that actually means in reality

This couple is so annoying.

I'm not even the biggest advocate against [alturistic, for example] surrogacy but I truly don't believe they care. Their kids are literally 4 years old. What have they done to for the birth mum, who went through all that?

I can't explain it but this article comes across as self-centred to me. They can't admit any wrongdoing. They use 'naive' as a cop out. You people are in your forties. Do you not research before giving away 40k?

Bianca heard about the biggest surrogacy company in the Ukraine on a Facebook group.

It is illegal to advertise your services as a surrogate mother or advertise that you are searching for a surrogate mother under U.K. law. FB groups circumvent this but it's still illegal. (Egg donor advertising is permitted).

‘They were offering a take-home baby guarantee,’ she says. ‘You pay around £40,000 and you keep going until you get a baby. They’ll swap out egg donors or surrogates until they get it right. And we thought, well, perfect.’

Well isn't that a lovely image. Welcome to 21st century Gilead. This couple thought a never ending mix and match arrangement, until the you got the prize baby for a flat fee, was 'perfect'. That tells you all you need to know about this couple.

It's good that the mail is highlighting how bad the surrogacy industry is, but I feel that there is an assumption that the solution is to legalise paid surrogacy here. That we could avoid all of these horror stories with guidance and rules?

The conditions these women are in are terrible, but separating babies away from their mothers, and the health implications of ivf is always glossed over.

but I feel that there is an assumption that the solution is to legalise paid surrogacy here.

Well spotted, you can see the agenda in the mainstream media can't you?

It's never presented as 'shall we ban this abhorrent baby buying' is it?

I can't explain it but this article comes across as self-centred to me.

I thought that too. It was all about how things weren't as they paid for. Their hotel was manky, that they had paid for. Their surrogate wasn't in the posh hospital that they had paid for etc. It was all about how terrible the experience was for them. They are obviously still very pro surrogacy, they just think it should be up to their standards.

@ZuttZeVootEeeVro

It's good that the mail is highlighting how bad the surrogacy industry is, but I feel that there is an assumption that the solution is to legalise paid surrogacy here. That we could avoid all of these horror stories with guidance and rules?

The conditions these women are in are terrible, but separating babies away from their mothers, and the health implications of ivf is always glossed over.

Oh, god, I hadn't thought of that. How could anybody read this article and think that?!

It's brutal.

@Tuberoses

I notice they grabbed the babies and ran. They didn’t refuse because of the terrible circumstances. They didn’t follow up the mother and check her welfare or give her extra cash for her troubles. They didn’t even report it at the time. What they did was sit on their arses for four years until it was far enough in the past that nobody was likely to take their babies away. THEN they decided to make a fuss. Like, they know this is terrible but they want to take advantage of it themselves and make sure they’re free and clear before they start telling everyone else it’s wrong and they shouldn’t do it.

Absolutely disgusting.

Wow that makes for difficult reading.

Who on Earth reads an advert for a 'guaranteed baby' and thinks "perfect?!" Who does that? Babies cannot be bought and sold, neither can women.
And they still left the woman who carried their children obviously distressed - again who does that?! That article is all about the role of the company, what about them, they bought babies.....the mind boggles.
My youngest dd was placed in my care the day she was born, (adopted) with her birth mother's consent, she lost the person most important to her that day, the sound of her birth mother's heartbeat, the smell of her.......that is a loss, an unavoidable one in my dd 's case given the circumstances but to coldly plan and pay to do that to a child.....I can't wrap my head around it.

Their surrogate, a 29-year-old baker, was found within a week. ‘I knew she was doing it for the money but that didn’t alarm me. I have a friend in the U.S. who has been a surrogate four times and does it for the money. I didn’t see it as exploitation,’ Bianca says.

No exploitation? Christ, does she know the meaning of the word.

For the twins (bet they had two embryos put in, two for the price of one), to be registered under a parental order in the U.K. the father must be the genetic father in this case, they are lucky as BioTec, a surrogacy agency in the Ukraine, admits that they have 'made mistakes' and sometimes the wrong embryo is implanted. BioTec have also claimed they are not the only agency who have made mistakes. Though the couple do seem more concerned about the stinky hotel, I'd be more concerned that the children where the ones I 'ordered', given the history.

"MPs are now calling for urgent reforms to deter British couples from going to the Ukraine."

Which MPs I wonder?
The APPG on surrogacy and the Law Commission have no intention of banning surrogacy tourism. They claim that by making it more "attractive" in the U.K. people will choose to do it I. The U.K. instead of travelling abroad.

How are they making it more appealing? By taking away women's rights and making pre-birth parental orders the norm. And encouraging more women to be surrogate mothers by allowing advertising and higher payments dressed up as "expenses". Trust me in this, the MPs expenses scandal has nothing in what a SM can claim as an "expense".