Another appalling surrogacy case

[LordSnot]

Article

A 72-year-old Scottish man and his wife commissioned a baby in the US. COVID then hit and they were unable to ship him over so he was "cared for by a professional nanny with no contact from his birth mother."

The man's wife died last year and he petitioned the courts for them both to be named on the baby's birth certificate, which was granted.

How can anybody defend surrogacy?

Jesus Christ, what a mess. I wonder if the 'gestational carrier' I.e. the child's actual mother is aware of all this. That the child is likely to be imminently left orphaned, in the care of a boarding school and a nanny who lives on a different continent.

That poor child.

What an unholy mess that is. Who on earth allows people in their late sixties to “commission” (horrific term) a baby on another continent. That poor boy - 1 year, from birth, with a nanny (aka foster parent surely), then moved over to the UK in the care of a 70-something man and a “godmother” of the same age who helps one day a week, with a boarding school being lined up for him in 7 years when his “father” turns 80. And the safety net of returning to the US to the care of the nanny should his “father” die at some point in the next 15 years. No one ever thought about the welfare of that child before they allowed this to happen did they.

The whole thing is ridiculous but we have a system that allows for it; money will buy you anything. That child will be orphaned soon.

So selfish. Poor child.

Very selfish. I also don’t think anyone over the age of 60 should be able to have a baby anyway.

I don’t agree with surrogacy, but I don’t think it will ever be banned. There must be stricter laws applied, such as the age of the parents. But I guess that’s gonna be hard too because of private surrogacy

It seems he will have a nice privileged life

What a mess. That poor child. They have a lot to answer for in going into surrogacy in the first place so unethical.

Not sure what you mean by this@serialcatbuyer ? The child gets to go to a (possibly good) boarding school and may inherit from the deceased “mother’s” estate, is that it? but his “father” is 72 and unlikely to survive his childhood or at least see it out in good health. The child’s back up is being shipped back to the US to be looked after by a person described as a professional nanny. He’s never known or met his birth mother and is allowed no contact with her. I use the word shipped as the child was bought and paid for and exported like a commodity. This case demonstrates all that is wrong with surrogacy.

The father seems to have a lot of money. There are worse childhoods

What a privilege. Ripped away from his mother. Raised by a nanny. Being told these two people are his parents despite never meeting them. Finds out his “mother” dies. And now the “father” is looking for a boarding school of all things which means he is going to lose the only caretaker he’s ever known to be placed in a school. And then it won’t be long before he finds out his “dad” dies.

Not really a privilege for a 3 year old little boy

All the money in the world can't buy you parents.

I wonder if the wife that died was significantly younger than the husband? Surely she must have been! Otherwise how could they have thought it was a good idea?

A 73-year-old friend of the deceased woman is providing childcare, so it's probable the wife was of a similar age.

Every time a surrogacy stone is turned over, awful stories are emerging. There have been 2 worrying court cases in the recent months

https://thecritic.co.uk/the-love-that-cant-be-erased/

At the heart of all of them seem to be the demands of the adults for "wish fulfilment" while the needs and rights of the child come way down on the list.

What selfish men. The child is not motherless. There is a mother there who wants to be in her child’s life, and they are depriving him of that because they want the child to have the identity of being motherless as part of the LGBTQIA stuff.

Very very selfish men, and you can guarantee that child will read this somewhere when he’s older and will resent his dads for trying to deprive him of his mother

The report reads to me that the 72 year is the actual father but not that the birth mother is the biological mother?
I know that the child was born in the US but it is still possible that the egg was a donor egg, fertilised by the 72 year old, and implanted in a surrogate mother.
I don't agree with any of it, but the boarding school he is talking about is for years away at secondary age, and the child has lived with the 72 year old for 3 years already.
It's still an unholy mess but it would explain the decision a bit more.

What a mess. Despite the inhumane mess of the way the little boy came into this world, I think the judge made the right decision in his best interests. What alternative could there be? Poor kid. Hope his privileged life includes both loving care and therapy.

I do, however, take great issue with the judge calling his birth mother his 'gestational carrier'. She acknowledged that the elderly father and deceased prospective mother would not be eligible for the normal process of acquiring parentage of a child removed from his mother at birth. Why did she not acknowledge that this little boy was removed from the only mother he had ever known? He was not removed from an incubator!

Abuse of language obscuring accurate meanings and terminology seems to be the feature of certain ideologies where the rights of children and women are being trashed in order to fulfil the wishes of men.
The tragedy is that politicians and so many in society fail to notice this pattern.

The articles are focusing on the father's age because that's the juicy angle, but to me it's a small part of why this is so wrong. A newborn was taken from his mother at birth and looked after by a paid nanny until he could be shipped to the people who'd bought him. If they were 32-year-olds it would be just as appalling.

I agree the whole thing is utterly dehumanising.

It is shocking and it makes me wonder if she was the biological mother or if they had insisted on donor egg in a surrogate so that she would have no claim to the baby.

Really looks like no one gave a flying fuck about the child's wellbeing. Appalling.

This is a horrific case. However "How can anybody defend surrogacy?". I think cases vary. I know woman who is acting as a surrogate for her sister. Both in their 30s, both consenting adults. Very different from this case.

The surrogate wasn't the biological mother. Another American donor was used. The surrogate had no legal rights.