Pope Francis calls for universal ban on surrogacy

[shockeditellyou]

https://www.thejournal.ie/pope-francis-calls-for-universal-ban-surrogacy-6267108-Jan2024/

Good for him. Encouragingly, the comments I’ve seen on another site where this was posted are almost entirely supportive of banning surrogacy, which I wasn’t expecting.

I wouldn't listen to a celibate childless bloke who presides over church which turned a blind eye to so much abuse, tore babies away from their young single mothers, declared in Africa that condoms were a sin, bringing about an AIDS epidemic.
Who the hell is he to judge ANYONE????

@StepIntoChristmasAgain i am not against surrogacy but i think you are missing the point that people here object to. It is the fact a baby has spent 9 months listening to and bonding with her birth mother. People against surrogacy feel that the baby suffers when they are then removed from her. No one here is saying all adopted babies are mistreated so you saying this one baby is treated well doesn’t make the argument you think it does.

@crumblingschools @andIsaid surrogacy doesn't sit well with me for the reasons people have mentioned, I just don't think it's all that black and white.

If it was the scenario with a female relative carrying a baby without payment, is that child a commodity?

Like it or not, he's seen as a moral authority by millions of people around the world and has a lot of influence. The church has done a lot of good as well as a lot of wrong. I'm an atheist but I don't think making the church out to be satanic serves anyone.

@NoCloudsAllowed but the question is should this man hold such influence and I don’t think he should. I also think as the number of people with religious beliefs reduces he becomes more and more irrelevant. Maybe this is why he is spouting such controversial stuff, to get himself back on the news.

But when they are with their fathers they are being removed from their mothers.

I agree it’s not black and white and it’s foolish to state that it is. For every horror story there is an incredibly positive one. Outright banning will not help anyone as it’s not exactly going anywhere.

In my opinion the only way a newborn should not be with their mother is if, tragically, the mother has died or presents a clear danger to the infant.
Surrogacy is horribly exploitative and hopefully the Pope’s stance will discourage normalising this practice.
Surrogacy as a means to avoid the ‘savage’ effect of pregnancy and childbirth is the worst reason ever. There are no good reasons.

If you're looking at men, why limit it to gay couples? Single straight men also can't have babies, should they be able to have them to order? Never mind all of the potential reasons why they can't find a woman to enter into a long term relationship with them, such as being an arsehole, or a thug, or a waster, or even a paedophile. If you argue that gay couples should be allowed to use surrogates, why doesn't your argument extend to all men?

I’m embarrassed to admit that I once considered surrogacy on our path to parenthood. I was so naive.

true consent can’t be purchased. It extends to every aspect of sex, including, and perhaps most importantly, pregnancy.

@Newsenmum how would you regulate it then? To make the rights and impact on the child the first priority, which it is in adoption cases. How do you stop the child feeling they were a commodity.

How do you stop the power imbalance? How often do we see a rich surrogate providing a child for a poor childless couple?

As well as the negative impacts on the baby, there's also the negative impact on the birth mother who is programmed to look after the baby. I had an emergency C section under general, I woke up on the way back from theatre and I was talking straight away and asking after the baby (albeit a bit groggy).

I asked the staff afterwards why I woke up so quickly, they said it's because after birth you are programmed to look after your baby whatever it takes and all the hormones etc can mean you get over the anaesthetic much faster.

Even if you've made the decision to give up the baby you can't turn off those instincts.

Not missing the point - but instead saying that it's because of these nuances, that a universal ban does not serve everyone.

I, like many people, have a big problem with 'buying babies' and surrogacy for obvious vanity projects. If this can be stopped, abso-fucking-lutely!

It is neither right nor wrong. Extremely sad and heartbreaking as is a cancer diagnosis, a accident that leaves you unable to walk or the violent death of a loved one but you live with them and deal with them. Just because you Daughter sadly may not be able to have a child it doesn't make it right to buy one. There are other people to consider in this situation not just your Daughter, their future and MH are for more important than your Daughters wants surely?

In all honesty? I don’t know how to do it perfectly. There needs to be a lot more vigorous research done.
My immediate thoughts are that first of all, a lot of counselling sessions for all parties involved including discussions about all potential eventualities. This includes the intended parents for sure. They need to be fully empathising with each other. None of this ‘using a body’ discussion you get from some celerities.
The surrogate will need her mental health fully examined and she shouldn’t be a surrogate for her first pregnancy. A lot of discussions about her feelings about her own children and why she wanted to do this. A woman who is in financial distress is not a suitable candidate imo. Her rights over her own body including how to give birth, what to eat, everything! Must be thoroughly discussed. Again imo it is the surrogate woman’s choice with all of this. Looking at the life of the baby and how he/she would feel. Roleplay scenarios, reading very real and distressing scenarios.

Basically the crazy (but very necessary hoops) you need to jump through for adoption.

I also think it should be like egg donation in the uk, where a child has the right to contact their birth parent (surrogate in this case).

If the uk put rules like that in place people would just go elsewhere. Like adoption. Plus why is it ok for people to have a baby of their own without counselling?

And what’s your point? Like you said, people will always do that anyway. The best thing you can do is implement protective rules.

And international adoption is incredibly regulated if done properly.

If his premise is the well-being of women, then there are other bigger issues that he could speak out about that affect far more

I’ll believe he cares about the reproductive rights of women and their autonomy over their own bodies once he advocates for birth control. Until then this is just another man telling women (yet again) what they should do

I have very conflicted views of surrogacy, but I’m not about to take the pope’s advice on it! Far better voices in this debate to pay attention to

I think for the pope it's primarily about the commodification and buying and selling of babies. The fact that it intrinsically is also about the commodification and buying and selling of women's bodies and paying poor women to endanger their health and life on behalf of rich people is in there too but is secondary. For me these two aspects share equal primacy.

The Pope is of the most influential people on the planet, and like anyone he is entitled to an opinion, but his qualifications to legislate on this issue are nil.

Oh look, some whatabouttery to distract from the thread topic.

People can buy Fairphones to stop exploiting mineral miners. There's no way to ethically outsource childbirth.

The problem with surrogacy is that it's not you "giving anything", but another woman.

No one has the right to a child.

tore babies away from their young single mothers

Perhaps it's because the nuns did that and caused unhealable harm to the mothers and their babies that the Pope is saying that we shouldn't create babies to order?

As always, the pro-baby-buyers fail to consider that life is complicated for women.

The Pregnancy Choices board is full of women who are considering ending their pregnancies for various reasons. Women who've realised that their husbands are abusing them and don't want to birth a child who will be used as another tool with which to abuse. Women whose husbands have left them or who've realised that their husband is cheating and don't want to raise a child alone.

If Alice and Bob commission Carol to bear their baby and Alice realises at 12 weeks that Bob has cheated on her, she has no right whatsoever to instruct Carol to abort so that Alice can leave Bob unencumbered by a shared child and have a fresh start. Carol would be left literally holding the baby, a baby that she thought she would be handing over. Any law that allowed Alice to force Carol to abort would be in violation of Carol's human rights.

Some 40% of pregnancies have complications. Some women abort because of these complications. If Alice is paying Carol for a baby, which is what happens with overseas surrogacy, that discourages Carol from putting her own health first if an abortion would be the best option for her. Even in the altruistic case, Carol knows that she risks her friendship with Alice by aborting. If Alice and Carol are sisters, an abortion even on medical grounds would probably result in estrangement.

Women are not walking incubators, but people, with full human rights. Babies are not commodities, but people, with full human rights from the moment that they are born. There is no way to have surrogacy that respects the full human rights of the baby and the surrogate mother.