Surrogacy - man plans to abuse the baby he is buying

[DifficultBloodyWoman]

Two gay men are the ‘commissioning parents’, also know as the baby buyers.
One man has been arrested for distributing child porn.
The other is a church pastor.

According to the article, the pedophile wrote, ‘I do love the idea of inviting a buddy over when I have my boy … just has to be someone I can trust obviously … I plan on getting my c* in him asap…’.

Horrifyingly, his parents-in-law, the parents of the church pastor, wrote glowing character references for him. ‘There should be more men like him in the world’.

And the kicker…the baby is being born in California where laws state the baby is the child of those two men unless they voluntarily relinquish parental responsibility.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13241501/chicago-veterinarian-dog-judge-charged-child-porn-sexually-assault.html

https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/chicago-veterinarian-child-porn-court/

@albaalba351 I don't think being gay works like that.

No couple - whether single sex or heterosexual - should be able to commission a surrogate child.

It isn't the sexuality of the parents that's the objection, it is treating a baby like a commodity, and. woman's body as something to be hired out.

There are massive risks for the women involved in this pernicious trade as well the risk of abuse for the children they bear.

What @Emotionalsupportviper said.

In the circumstances the baby should either be with the mother or with the buying parent who wasn't a paedophile.

But babies should not be trafficked.

Thats just fucking horrifying.

Isn’t adoption the removal of a child from their mother as well?

That isn’t the purpose of the pregnancy. Adoption is a last resort when parents are unable or unwilling, and prevents the child from suffering neglect and abuse. It’s a protective action. Surrogacy is the opposite.

Do you not see how that's a totally different scenario?

Yes it’s very different - I was simply challenging the logic of being against surrogacy. There are lots of reasons people might be anti-surrogacy but to suggest it’s about the child being removed from the mother whilst suggesting adoption as an alternative in the next breath seems a tad contradictory.

I’m not sure if I’m misunderstanding what you’re saying but I’m reading that you’re saying surrogacy is the opposite of preventing a child from suffering and neglect. Or do you mean surrogacy at its core isn’t an action designed to protect?

As someone unable to conceive naturally I’ve considered surrogacy. Because of that I’m in an echo chamber of sorts of others who have gone through the process. I guess like planned pregnancy the purpose is to have a genetically related child to me who will be loved and much desired. I suppose that’s similar to lots of other people who go through IVF, or plan their pregnancies.

Obviously that’s different to others who get pregnant who have no desire to be a parent or who choose to bring a child into a dangerous environment or a home where they will be neglected or abused.

Couldn’t agree more. I’ve made almost identical comments on MN before that have been deleted by admins. I’m so glad to see these comments staying up. People sympathetic to the LGBT movement refuse to acknowledge the very real reality that there are groomers and pedophiles among them that purchase babies for this exact reason. The protection of feelings and fear of being branded some type of phobic trumps protecting innocent life from the most sickening harm imaginable, and calling attention to the fact that this is real and does happen. I cry when I think about those babies.

It’s made me feel sick to my stomach, the poor nieces and nephews he mentions. How can the family possibly believe he is innocent after seeing the messages, baby clothes and scan photo?! I hope he never gets out.

It's not contradictory, because they are two totally different situations!

what I’m saying is that removing a baby at birth from the mother it has grown within and bonded with potentially creates a primal wound and emotional harm. With adoption this happens as a last resort to protect the child from greater harm. With surrogacy, it is a choice by the parents to inflict that loss upon a baby through their own selfish desire to have a child.

It is different to IVF, as IVF still means that the child would be carried by the mother they grow up with, who also bears the risks of pregnancy.

Incidentally I too cannot conceive naturally but would never consider surrogacy, even though a dear friend offered. I could not in good faith inflict those risks on my friend, or the baby.

Adoption is making the best out of a bad situation (the mother is unable or unwilling to parent the child so they will be separated from their mother no matter what, so adoption is the next best option for the child) whereas surrogacy is making that bad situation (removal of a baby from their mother) on purpose. Deliberately causing that trauma to the baby. Very very different situations.

Mark Newton and Peter Truong adopted a Russian boy for sexual abuse. They got 40 and 30 years respectively.

Unfortunately Bumble, nothing is 100% safe.

All we can do is reduce the risks as much as possible, and surrogacy (apart from being the immoral exploitation of both woman and child) remains considerably more open to abuse than adoption.

Absolute scum of the fucking earth.
These were obviously his plans going into surrogacy (which I also don't agree with).
I just hope the baby gets adopted into a warm, loving caring family.
It's an absolutely horrifying situation and makes me wonder how many other couples have done this. I hate the world at times, I truly do.

Surely though if you think surrogacy is OK, this form of child abuse must be fine too? If you can buy a baby like you can buy an inanimate object because money gives you absolute rights, when do the limits to what you can do with it start?

I think in terms of risk to babies surrogacy provides less risk than unsuitable parents up and down the country getting pregnant naturally who bring babies into abusive homes, are born drug addicted etc.

I say that because surrogacy or IVF groups are overwhelmingly made up of would-be parents who are desperate to have children. You’ll see 99.9% of those people there trying with good intentions to have a child. Compared to the general ‘can get pregnant’ group, the percentage of people having babies with good intentions is still overwhelmingly high of course but will have more people who end up in care/abused/being put up for adoption. (You just need to compare the relative numbers of kids born to both groups to see which is higher).

As someone considering surrogacy I definitely don’t believe it’s exploitative or immoral. I think if you think along those lines then things like living-transplants are exploitative and immoral as well, which I also believe in.

I really want to cry at this. This is a man who is admitting he abuses his nieces and nephews. That he can’t wait to get his new born baby so he can rape him too. And not only is his family standing by, they are defending him!

If I was the surrogate mother, I would run. How can they even think of giving him custody?!

How can his parents even say he is a good man when he admitted to it!! It’s sick

I’m just glad that the pedophile was caught before abusing a new innocent adopted baby. Too often, they are never caught and get away with it. I don’t see what this has to do with surrogacy as pedophiles will abuse related children, adopted children, stepchildren, children they teach/coach and so on and so on.

It is possible for partners to have no idea. A friend of mine, her husband was arrested after 14yrs of marriage for trying molest little girls. She found out the day he was arrested and it completely destroyed her and their DC. It’s taken years for her to stop blaming herself for not knowing. Pedophiles are very good at keeping a mask on.

Ageee totally, not sure about the relevance of surrogacy vs adoption vs step children. Abusers will abuse, sadly.

Thanks can we please stop calling it that? Normalised it if called porn.

Also too upset to click on the link.

With adoption there is a very thorough assessment. Of course some abusers will slip through but the vast majority of unsuitable candidates won't be approved. With step parenting at least there is one protective parent. Surrogacy is like the Wild West. No regulation.

Adoption, as it is presently done, is child focused. Surrogacy is focused on the commissioning parents and not the most vulnerable party involved (the baby).

I don’t like to comment publicly on surrogacy because I have hard time explaining why I am so against it.

If there was a situation where surrogate parents had to pass an adoption assessment, I could become more comfortable. But now it seems like it’s just people commissioning newborns and buying babies with zero oversight.