Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: chat

Rebel Wilson has had her first child via surrogate

339 replies

ShirleyPhallus · 07/11/2022 16:58

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

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
ArabellaScott · 07/11/2022 19:50

CrossStichQueen · 07/11/2022 17:14

I dont care who it is who is buying a baby and renting a womans body it is a disgusting practice and should be banned world wide.

Yep.

CrossStichQueen · 07/11/2022 19:52

What difference does that make. I thought you were arguing based on facts on emotion?

Because when you give birth the connection between mother and baby is very real and to disregard that connection they way you have leads to to believe that you have not given birth.
Also when did I say this was based on facts not emotions?

threegoodthings · 07/11/2022 19:55

Walkden · 07/11/2022 19:42

"What about the baby at the end of it who has a physiological connection and relationship to the woman who gestates it, suddenly being torn away from that very same person who is all they've known"

I'm sure for the mother there are very strong connections to the child they gestated. I'm not convinced there is for the new born child and neither are the people who wrote the laws on surrogacy either as it would not be allowed otherwise.

You don't think a baby has a strong connection to its mother? I'm sorry what now?!

LastNCof2022 · 07/11/2022 19:59

Walkden · 07/11/2022 17:41

"It's gross, and exploitative, regardless of the reason."

Surely if we believe your body your choice surrogacy is a matter for the people involved.

After all no one has a problem paying people for medical trials or to fight in wars which also present significant and in some cases considerably more, risk to the person being paid.

Excellent point.

MummyGummy · 07/11/2022 20:02

I'm not convinced there is for the new born child and neither are the people who wrote the laws on surrogacy either as it would not be allowed otherwise.

How ignorant and naive. There is plenty of evidence of the trauma newborns suffer being removed from their mother, which has long term effects on their neurological development and behaviour.

The people who legalised it don’t care about the babies rights.

Walkden · 07/11/2022 20:04

"You don't think a baby has a strong connection to its mother? I'm sorry what now"

I don't doubt that there is a connection and especially on the mother's side. I am not convinced that if you separate the baby from the surrogate mother after say a week that the baby will remember it at say one year old.

This is of course quite an upsetting for mother's to contemplate due to the very strong bonds they have with their own children.

As I've said eventually there will be studies on surrogate children which may or may not lead to law changes in the future.

CrossStichQueen · 07/11/2022 20:04

Excellent point.

You think its an excellent point to liken the needs and rights of a baby to that of an adult choosing to join the army or take part in medical trials.....ummm ok then.

RoseslnTheHospital · 07/11/2022 20:05

No, not excellent points. Neither medical trials nor fighting in wars involve the sale of another human being. They are about personal risk. Human medical trials could quite easily be seen as exploitative, I would hope that those recruiting participants have to follow strict guidelines to prevent that.

In the case of fighting in wars, the extreme personal risk is accepted by the individual as the external threat is a bigger issue.

CrossStichQueen · 07/11/2022 20:08

As I've said eventually there will be studies on surrogate children which may or may not lead to law changes in the future.

So countless children should be emotionally damaged because some people think it's OK to buy and sell humans and there are no laws on it yet?
Again Slavery was at one time illegal do you agree with Slavery or do you only disagree with it because its now illegal?

Oblomov22 · 07/11/2022 20:09

I am very unhappy about this. Very. She doesn't seem stable. At all.

She was apparently was forced to declare her new relationship because some newspaper was going to out her as gay. A new relationship with a female. No longevity. No stability. Very new relationship. And now, this baby is born.

In May 2022, Wilson hinted that she was seeing someone new while discussing her attempts to get back into the dating scene.
One month later, the actress took her relationship with Agruma public on social media. Instagram selfie of the happy couple in June 2022.

So how the heck did you decide to hire a surrogate, 9 months ago, in Feb 22?

How? Just how?

Forfrigz · 07/11/2022 20:11

She's probably diabetic, most Americans are by her age.

Walkden · 07/11/2022 20:11

So countless children should be emotionally damaged because some people think it's OK to buy and sell humans"

Scaremongering nonsense. If lawmakers thought the child would be emotionally damaged they would not allow surrogacy and there are laws on it - you just don't agree with them.

Walkden · 07/11/2022 20:14

"She's probably diabetic, most Americans are by her age"

1). Do you have evidence that the majority of Americans are diabetic by age 42

  1. Rebel Wilson is Australian!
CrossStichQueen · 07/11/2022 20:14

Why are you missing off the rests of my posts Walkden?

MrsTumblebee · 07/11/2022 20:17

autumndays2 · 07/11/2022 17:20

I think Rebel posted on Instagram last year that she had medical issues around becoming pregnant.

Anyone can say that. It doesn’t mean it’s true.

Walkden · 07/11/2022 20:19

"Why are you missing off the rests of my posts Walkden?"

You've missed off plenty of mine!

Surrogacy is not "buying and selling of humans". If it were it would be illegal, obviously. Comparisons with slavery is a false equivalence.

threegoodthings · 07/11/2022 20:20

@Walkden a child won't consciously remember being removed from its mother as a baby, no. But the act of that removal causes changes to the brain that will potentially affect them for the rest of their life.

Fancylike · 07/11/2022 20:20

MrsTumblebee · 07/11/2022 20:17

Anyone can say that. It doesn’t mean it’s true.

It’s a good way to pre-empt your plans to
use a surrogate. Just point back and say see, it’s “medical issues”, and you’ll instantly get more people backing up your decision to buy a baby.

Walkden · 07/11/2022 20:21

"But the act of that removal causes changes to the brain that will potentially affect them for the rest of their life."

.is there a source/ study for this claim?

CrossStichQueen · 07/11/2022 20:21

You've missed off plenty of mine!

No I haven't!

Surrogacy is not "buying and selling of humans". If it were it would be illegal, obviously. Comparisons with slavery is a false equivalence.

Money changes hands for a baby. How is that not buying and selling a human?
Calling it expenses does not change that fact.

threegoodthings · 07/11/2022 20:22

Walkden · 07/11/2022 20:21

"But the act of that removal causes changes to the brain that will potentially affect them for the rest of their life."

.is there a source/ study for this claim?

Yes. Go and do your own research.

RoseslnTheHospital · 07/11/2022 20:25

Walkden · 07/11/2022 20:19

"Why are you missing off the rests of my posts Walkden?"

You've missed off plenty of mine!

Surrogacy is not "buying and selling of humans". If it were it would be illegal, obviously. Comparisons with slavery is a false equivalence.

Just because you repeat that doesn't make it true. It obviously is the buying and selling of children and it is legal because it's called surrogacy and people gloss over the issues by focussing on the desires of commissioning adults and diminishing the rights of the child. Surrogacy is currently legal in the UK but as previous posters have explained, it doesn't have to stay that way.

antipodeancanary · 07/11/2022 20:27

I remember saying on here a few years ago that within 50 years western women (other than the poorest) would not be carrying their own children. Surrogates or artificial wombs would be the norm. Have to say its happening quicker even than I thought. As the world wide gap between rich and poor increases as it is doing, surrogacy will become cheaper as poor woman get more desperate. I cannot see this ending well.

Walkden · 07/11/2022 20:28

"Yes. Go and do your own research"

I did and commented on it earlier. Most studies show brain chemistry changes are for older children who have stronger well established connections to, and have been nurtured by parents.

I found nothing on similar effects on new born babies. Presumably because this is relatively uncommon.

Tansytea · 07/11/2022 20:28

Walkden · 07/11/2022 20:19

"Why are you missing off the rests of my posts Walkden?"

You've missed off plenty of mine!

Surrogacy is not "buying and selling of humans". If it were it would be illegal, obviously. Comparisons with slavery is a false equivalence.

Surrogacy is illegal in plenty of places. Plenty of civilized Western European countries.