Rebel Wilson has had her first child via surrogate

[ShirleyPhallus]

Rebel Wilson (who I love) has announced via IG that she’s had her first baby via surrogate this week. Lovely for her to have a baby.

But the topic of surrogacy rears its ugly head and once again I’m wondering why so many rich and famous women choose to have a surrogate. Rebel has had significant publicity with her weight struggles and is currently in a relationship with a woman (she doesn’t name her as co-parent).

she hasn’t publicly said why she used a surrogate but I feel a bit uncomfortable by this as being a step yet again

Do you think we shouldn’t be giving blood then?

Yes. Very coincidental…

How is giving blood remotely comparable to the scenario you’ve quoted?

This is right up there with the most stupid things I’ve read on MN.

After donating blood the plasma is replaced after 24 hours. The red blood cells are replaced after 6 weeks. You don’t need the blood you’ve donated back, do you? So you’re not renting it out.

I have no idea! I’m not entirely sure what’s the issue with surrogacy. We is why i asked

But your womb bounces back. I genuinely don’t see the issue of all parties are happy?

I work with neglected children and attachment issues are very rarely due to their birth

Why don't you read the thread?

But you’re not renting your blood out are you? If you fill up someone’s water bottle from your tap, you’re not going to ask for it back are you, because it will be resupplied.

The uterus bounces back? Probably. But pregnancy has a 100% complication rate. And many surrogates are multiparous with complication on top of complication, even if small.

Most children with attachment issues have issues from events later in their life, that’s true. And it’s true it’s rarely from issues at birth. But that’s like comparing car crashes to motorbike crashes. There are far more cars on the road, so there’s far more trauma from cars. But it doesn’t mean motorbikes are safer. Trauma from birth is a recognised problem. Children born of surrogates or sperm donors have grown up wondering who their mother or father is. People who have never known who their parent is often wonder.

Separating a newborn from its mother is considered so significant that in most jurisdictions, a family court judge decides if it’s absolutely necessary.

Except in surrogacy.

I tell you what, if your blood was sentient, and might be so traumatised by being removed from you that it had significant problems functioning for the rest of its life, then I might oppose donating it.

"your womb bounces back"

Dear god.

There's a huge amount of ignorance there to unpack. Perhaps looking up the risks of pregnancy and surrogacy yourself might be a good starting point because I doubt anyone here has the time to fill in the gaps in your knowledge

Interesting that this should happen in Hollywood and be a 'fashion'. Robert Heinlein posits the idea in The Moon is a Harsh Mistress (a very good sci fi, though I never liked much else he wrote). I remember accepting the idea as futuristic when I read this (I would have been late teens or early twenties) but looking back it is deeply uncomfortable - it's the heroine who does this for money btw (and there is a racist element since the babies are all Chinese - interesting Heinlein should pick up a future wealthy China, perhaps he'd read Nostradamus - I would not have either the surrogacy or the possible racism removed btw I do not like retro-fixing literature to conform to current mores).

Women who are comfortably off wouldn't be commercial surrogates. Only the poor can be exploited.

Paris Hilton says she was unable to carry a pregnancy due to a sexual assault and medical abuse at school.

Paris then denied that her decision to use a surrogate had anything to do with age, explaining that she would have used a surrogate in her 20s due to abuse she faced while at Provo Canyon School in Utah. “I’m just so scared, I think, again, leading back to Provo, of even being in a doctor’s office, just all of that. The shots, the IVs that they put in," Paris explained.
Indeed, Paris alleged that the school would regularly take samples of her blood. Elsewhere in the interview, she alleged that during her time in such behavioral modification programs, she was sent to "solitary confinement" in a room with "blood on the walls, feces, urine" for not taking the mandated drugs. She further said that she was subjected to "late-night gynecological examinations" that involved being held down and digitally penetrated.

But I think it's safe to assume that Paris does have sex with her husband and would have had to manage the IVF treatment involving needles and vaginal penetration to harvest the eggs. She had a total of 42, of which 7 are male embryos.

I'm one who believes women when they say they have been assaulted or abused, until proven otherwise, but on this one I'm afraid I'm not convinced.

These allegations are not new but are a reminder alongside the birth of her and her husband's surrogate-born child and with the dismissal that she wasn't a factor (as she doesn't want that to be part of her public image?). Has no legal action was taken against the school to expose institutional medical and sexual abuse of a child, and possibly other children, despite the family's massive wealth? Was it just Paris the holiday camp boarding school put in solitary confinement? What on Earth is behind the claim that a school wanted her blood samples?

The article shares no statement from the school.

www.buzzfeed.com/natashajokic1/paris-hilton-surrogacy-explained

I can believe that Paris was sexually assaulted and treated abysmally at that boarding institution...obviously we don't know for certain, but I wouldn't be surprised by this at all just based on the prevalence of sexual assault and the poor treatment of many others at these places. The lie seems to be in the 'why did we do surrogacy'. It's a PR move to show that it wasn't for convenience, that it was for 'reasons' that, as OhHolyJesus shows, are suspicious, but that Paris hoped would look better for her public image.