Liz Kendall, baby by surrogacy

[womanity]

www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/nov/24/labour-liz-kendall-having-baby-surrogacy

I love Liz. Disappointed she’s chosen to rent a womb and buy a baby.

On a blog post from this thread

To think maternity leave was not intended for this http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/amiibeingunreasonable/4412214-to-think-maternity-leave-was-not-intended-for-this

It mentions a U.K. man who bought triplets from America. He was 54 at the time, he went through an agency there, a woman gave her eggs and he fertilised them and a different woman grew the babies, all sons now in their 20s so the dad must be mid 70s.

Whether it's a single man, single woman or Kendall and her husband, buying kids in your 50s...I don't see the difference.

@teezletangler

She may well have frozen eggs or embryos from prior infertility treatment years ago.

Possible but extremely unlikely given the timeline and the fact that she was at least 45 since she's been with her current partner.

I suspect that would have been mentioned if it were the case.

@OhHolyJesus

On a blog post from this thread

To think maternity leave was not intended for this [[http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am]]iibeingunreasonable/4412214-to-think-maternity-leave-was-not-intended-for-this

It mentions a U.K. man who bought triplets from America. He was 54 at the time, he went through an agency there, a woman gave her eggs and he fertilised them and a different woman grew the babies, all sons now in their 20s so the dad must be mid 70s.

Whether it's a single man, single woman or Kendall and her husband, buying kids in your 50s...I don't see the difference.

Some of the comments on that thread are mind boggling.

For the posters asking 'whats wrong with surrogacy?'

Did you not see the news coverage of the 20+ Ukranian babies in a hotel room who's parents couldn't come and collect their purchase?
So sad were some of the parents to have missed the newborn stage that they cancelled their order.

Or Baby Gammy, who's Australian 'parents' no longer wanted him because he had Downs Syndrome, leaving the surrogate to care for a child she didn't plan for.

And what does the surrogate do if the couple wants her to abort or raise the child herself if there's a good chance if a abnormality or defect? Or the baby isn't the preferred sex?

Every 'altruistic' surrogacy - and no surrogacy comes without pressure & expectation - paves the way for these situations.

And if you argue it's about bodily autonomy, do you also feel we should allow people to sell kidneys? And if not, what's the difference?

Just because we can doesn't mean we should. I think Groggy's point about how we don't allow people to sell their organs shows surrogacy seems to lack tighter enough ethical oversight.
The below has a lot of surrogacy stories - what strikes me is in one of the first instances of surrogacy in the UK, the surrogate mother had regret. Decades later people still seem to think it's ok?

stopsurrogacynowuk.org/2021/11/26/surrogacy-in-the-extreme/

Surrogacy is less ethical than selling organs. It's selling someone else's organs- it's selling a whole human to someone else.

@gordongrumpy

Surrogacy is less ethical than selling organs. It's selling someone else's organs- it's selling a whole human to someone else.

True. Also, in the case of organ donation, you are saving someone's life.

Renting a womb?

I honestly hope that I have misunderstood something here, or I don't know the full story.

Many women cannot have a baby in their womb and need help on that regard, this doesn't mean they "rent" a womb. Why she should not become a mother? Because she is older?

@dutchessmom

Renting a womb?

I honestly hope that I have misunderstood something here, or I don't know the full story.

Many women cannot have a baby in their womb and need help on that regard, this doesn't mean they "rent" a womb. Why she should not become a mother? Because she is older?

People should be entitled to fertility treatment and medical care to help them become parents.

People should not be entitled to the use of other peoples bodies to become parents.

It’s not a difficult concept

Its akin to the slave trade IMHO. Treating human babies as commodities. The more I think about it the more disgusted I am.

Why she should not become a mother? Because she is older?

No, because she is in her 50s she has missed her chance sadly to become a mother naturally and just because that is sad doesn't mean she can buy a baby by renting the body of a younger, more fertile (probably poorer) woman. She isn't infertile, she missed her fertile window.

If Liz Kendall is 'infertile' because of her age, is this man 'infertile' because of his age, or because he can't make a baby with another man?

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10172751/I-dont-think-Im-doing-wrong-Businessman-66-UKs-oldest-surrogate-father.html

...and course he doesn't think he's doing anything wrong. Women, we have our uses.

"'I have lots of nieces and nephews, so it doesn't make a difference to me, but I wanted to do it for him. My partner is 40. He wants to be biologically connected to the child and that I can understand.'"

Gosh. A desperately wanted baby - isn't that the narrative? "It doesn't make any difference to me" probably wouldn't go down so well with an adoption panel if commissioning parents were subject to the same checks as adoptive parents.

I feel for anyone who longs to have a child. But this couple already have three adopted children. How are those children going to feel? Weren’t they good enough?

They may well feel hat they didn't live up to expectations and a genetic 'better' child is more wanted.

For clarity, I don't think Liz Kendall has three children already.

@thinkingaboutLangCleg

I feel for anyone who longs to have a child. But this couple already have three adopted children. How are those children going to feel? Weren’t they good enough?

I think that's Baroness Oona King, this baby who will be birthed by a woman who presumably is receiving 'expenses' for her pregnancy, will be Liz Kendall's first child, or will be her first legal child once she has the parental order granted.

Many women cannot have a baby in their womb and need help on that regard, this doesn't mean they "rent" a womb.

What help are women ( and in some cases men) getting with regard to not having a baby in their womb if it isn't renting someone else's?

They are entering into a transaction to use another woman's womb for a period of time for the purpose of growing a child.

This baby when born will be removed from its birth mother and given to others because these people exchanged money to ensure this happens.

gordongrumpy

It's always poorer women doing it for richer people. You don't find well off women offering to be altruistic surrogates for Debbie and John on the council estate who can't afford IVF, but will be lovely parents.

This^^

Whilst it’s one way only it’s exploitative.

And I don’t see anyone in favour of surrogacy raising the very real additional medical problems there are when the baby is not genetically connected to the mother, they gloss over the fact that these pregnancies are higher risk, and the risk is death.

Infertility is heartbreaking, I’ve been there. Exploiting women and buying babies is not the answer.

@Hazbot

I felt quite a lot of dismay when seeing this headline as I felt that it's another surrogacy story glossing over it's exploitative nature.

As a previous surrogate, I am now completely anti-surrogacy as I don't believe that women can make a fully informed choice about being a surrogate. We just don't know how pregnancy will affect us and so the risks are really uncertain.

I read that a lot of women freely consent to being a surrogate however I really don't believe that you can consent to something that you have very little idea of how it will affect you.

In my situation, I was really naïve and didn't know much about surrogacy. All the stories that I had seen were positive and so when I started to feel uncomfortable, I felt that I was the problem as surrogacy was portrayed to be this amazing thing. I didn't have the confidence or support to speak up and so continued with it which has in turn caused an incredible amount of trauma for everyone involved.

I hugely struggled with giving up the baby (I am also the biological mother) and have since fought to remain in the child's life. The commissioning parents are financially better off than me, which is so often the case with surrogacy and so they were able to pay for legal representation whereas I couldn't and represented myself.

In theory, in the UK, the surrogate can change her mind however the reality for me was a lot different. There was a huge amount of obligation and pressure to hand over the baby. I was also legally told that the courts would not have looked favourably at me wishing to keep the baby because of the surrogacy agreement which is not legally binding.

I've spoken to a couple of surrogates where the commissioning parents have literally cut them out of their lives once the baby has been born and so this 'friendship first' ethos that this sold in this country is a false narrative for many, many surrogacies.

In the UK where it is supposedly altruistic and where the surrogate receives expenses rather than a lump sum, is also misleading in my belief. Expenses can cover so many different things and I found in my case, that the judge and Cafcass really didn't care what was being paid. Commercial surrogacy is taking place behind the scenes.

I hope in this instance, this opens up the discussion more and encourages surrogates who haven't had a great time or have felt exploited, to speak up and tell their story.

This should be much more in the media It’s entirely one sided. Positive

Thank you

Can I ask - was it a friend? Do you still have contact?

You on earth “legal told you”??

She's 50!! Is this fair to the child?