Louise Thompson and surrogacy

[somethinginbetweenlove]

Louise Thompson had, by all accounts, a very traumatic experience during childbirth where she nearly died.

She has now decided to use surrogacy for a second baby. She is using a private IVF clinic in London and posting a lot about how hard she is finding the egg retrieval process.

I really don’t understand how she can, in good faith, do this. She is all too aware of the risks that a healthy woman can face. Yet she is choosing to buy another woman’s body, and expose her to potentially life long health consequences. I’m disgusted

I agree with PP, it’s awful that she had a haemorrhage. But when I read her book I did think somethings were taken very OTT that were unfortunately fairly normal for pregnancy and birth etc. Some bits were quite melodramatic. I suppose I know at least half a dozen women with births as bad as Louise’s or worse really.

I don’t have an issue with her doing the surrogacy - going against the grain here. She’s clearly desperate for another baby and can and will purse that.

Great tweet yesterday about surrogacy:

“if you think about it “our doctors told us surrogacy was the safest option for us” is kinda brilliant because it will technically always be true”

After reading the article someone posted about the surrogacy in Georgia yday I'm sickened. I hope at least she is using a surrogate mother in the UK where she is unlikely to be trafficked and abused.

And yes to dr saying it's safest - ie "I would rather another woman take the consequences of childbirth" than me....

Terrible to use a surrogate

But doesn’t she now have to have a stoma due to the childbirth and complications she had? Surely that is very very unusual and she is entitled to feel that she had a terrible birth? I don’t think people on this thread should be minimising how awful her birth was. However awful it was, no one deserves surrogacy, but we can fully empathise with the fact that she has to suffer life long consequences.

(I personally had a terrible birth that was heading in Louise’s direction - sunny side up, stuck and over 9lbs and very small frame, but I managed to insist on getting in front of a consultant as soon as the morning shift began. I had blood in my vomit more than 12 hours before I got to see a doctor - and he agreed that a c section was the only way to save us both. I was so lucky. I did, like many women who have a long labour and EMCS, have some PND and trauma, but would have stopped at one baby rather than have another by surrogate. It was easier for me though, because I was ultimately able to have another baby by CS and I guess that’s not a possibility for Louise. It can be very hard to let go of how things should have gone - Louise should have had a decent birth and spent time cradling her tiny baby rather than in hospital with people cutting into her to save her life. But I think ideally she needs counselling for this and to lean into her child, rather than trying to recreate a more “perfect” experience later. The better thing for her mental health would be to step away from being an influencer - it can really mess with your head looking at others’ perfect lives / families / births as a normal person if you spend too long on it and she is fully immersed)

@matresenseI agree that her birth sounds awful, but I think the stoma is due to ulcerative colitis.

I saw this from Emma Hilton this morning. I think that so many of the people exploiting women’s bodies to effectively produce children on demand need to read about the risks that they are putting those women through.

“ The mother-baby interface, where the placenta embeds into the uterus wall, is an immunological battleground.

It is in baby’s best interests to invade deeply enough to draw maximum nutrients and oxygen from Mum’s blood supply for growth. To achieve this, baby remodels Mum’s blood vessels and modulates her immune system to make the uterus welcoming rather than hostile.

It is Mum’s best interests to keep that invasion under control so she can protect her own health. To achieve this, her immune system regulates the placenta and restrains its growth without harming baby.

A normal maternal-fetal battle is one of compromise. But in a normal maternal-fetal battle, Mom and baby have partially compatible immunogenetics, and this makes the delicate balance easier to maintain.

When baby is not genetically related to Mum, the balance can be harder - or even impossible - to achieve. Mum’s immune system may ramp up to fight against the wholly foreign tissue. In response, placental invasion becomes more aggressive.

The result is tissue damage, blood vessel damage, and inflammation, and this risks placental dysfunction/disorders.

Ergo, surrogate pregnancies have a higher complication rate than those where Mum is related to baby.

(There are additional reasons for pregnancy complications, like those more generally associated with IVF.) “

https://x.com/fondofbeetles/status/1963557630452051974?s=46

I've thought this, she's been through something many women go through, and she is incredibly privileged. I know trauma does affect everyone differently, but she obviously needs better help/therapists/medication to be dwelling quite so much.

I also think if her experience is so bad, that you don't want to go through labour again, then don't have any more children. Plenty of women on Mumsnet are in that position.

Not agreeing with surrogacy at all, but I think she’s referenced having miscarriages even after Leo so I don’t think it was a choice based purely on her previous birthing experience.

The baby can't consent.

No baby consents to being conceived or born

Why do you think it is ok for a child to be commoditised by being delivered through outsourcing?

When did exploiting a woman and a child in this way be considered acceptable?

Whilst I don’t agree with surrogacy I think both these comments are actually really really nasty. She has some very serious medical conditions. Those aren’t somatic disorders or munchausens and to allege she let her child become seriously unwell is extremely unkind.

Who said it's exploitation? Two consenting adults agree to have a baby ... It's that what traditional parenting is too?

Is this why In donor egg pregnancy and surrogacy where it’s not the woman’s egg there is a much higher risk of gestational diabetes and preeclampsia?

I thought it was illegal to pay a surrogate in the UK? Apart from reasonable expenses, which can’t be much. Or do you reckon she’s secretly paying her? Might be wrong about this but I think Kim Kardashian did the same with one of her kids

Can’t believe she’s moaning about the egg retrieval when the other woman’s going to have to go through giving birth! Geeez check your fucking privilege. I’ve been through egg retrieval and it’s a piece of cake compared to giving birth, half an hour where you’re completely dead to the world and can’t feel anything then a couple of days of cramps!

I’m going to assume this is a joke or wind up.

Can anyone really be so stupid?

Surrogacy is evil, selfish and disgusting! As I said on the surrogacy board, I will think about supporting surrogacy the moment a RICH woman offers to be a surrogate for a poor woman in a developing country, instead of it always being the other way around.

I don’t agree with surrogacy but Louise’s birth experiences were not minor or normal. She almost died twice and has a permanent stoma.

I bet you think a prostitute is a 'consenting girl/woman' too...

The power differential between a rich couple and a poor woman in an impoverished developing country struggling to feed herself is not the same. That in 2026 there are people like you who don't see the clear exploitation, is shameful.

Which is exactly why you'd think she'd know better than to do this to another woman! All the more reason!!

And there is adoption, and/or fostering. It's not like surrogacy is the only choice.

Any utilisation of a person to fulfil a service is exploiting that person as a resource. It may be for positive results, but it is exploiting a resource none the less

And can you explain the consent dynamic ? How can it be that true consent ? Financial power and emotional power from any source make this a transaction.

You talk about consent but I don’t believe you understand the consent dynamic in this these situations. And as others have pointed out, no child consents to being transacted in this way.

sure, I agree. Just responding to the misinformation with some PPs saying she has munchausens or is being dramatic etc. I should have quoted.

I saw she wanted another baby but I didn’t realise it was via surrogacy!!! I thought it was illegal in the UK?? How is she doing it in London if so.. I got the impression from her instagram posts that she was considering having a baby herself as she was talking about ‘the risks’ etc. I did think wow that’s brave given what happened with her first. Did not realise it was via surrogacy!!