To ask if you've regretted surrogacy/struggled to bond?

[ivfregret]

Posting for traffic the other forums do not get much response.

This is not a thread about the ethics of surrogacy so I'm hoping it doesn't become that.

I'm posting because starting a family myself is becoming a very unlikely route for me and I may have to consider surrogacy.

I'm just concerned about bonding with the child/having regrets so I'd like to know if anyone has had this experience experience?

Thanks in advance

It is quite possible for decent humans to do despicable things.

I wonder how many of the people who say they couldn't 'buy a baby' have no issues with IVF, in which parents pay a fortune for potentially several rounds to have a baby. What about non-IVF fertility treatments and tests? Clomid isn't free to the NHS, someone has to pay for it.

None of those involved another person’s body.

I don’t mind as a taxpayer Clomid being available on the NHS. Many medications are that I wouldn’t necessarily take myself.

What about people joining the armed forces?

For the last time - carrying someone else’s baby isn’t a public protection issue.

Yes there does seem to be this legal loophole which is being fully exploited.

Of course they do, all drugs and treatments go through several rounds of clinical trials. There were many humans that put themselves up for those trials in exchange for money. For all fertility treatments and drugs, at some point someone was paid to test them on their own body. Not even to get pregnant themselves, they do tests just so see side effects etc. They're still doing tests for all any new ones that come up.

All I'm saying is that depending on which side you're prejudiced towards, you'll find an argument and counterarguement. No one will ever win because everyones views are so extreme.

That's an interesting insight @IWantRebeccasConfidence - have you given birth to a baby for someone else? I may have missed it where you said you had so just double checking.

I don't think being addicted to pregnancy sounds all that healthy.

It doesn’t mention the child either @OhHolyJesus, some posters don't seem concerned about a baby being taken away from its mum

I find it alarming that some people think it’s acceptable to borrow a woman’s womb, invade her body for NINE MONTHS with invasive and often painful procedures…and scoff about the same woman giving birth alone or being with the baby she’s borne after the birth. And saying that’s “Not good for anyone”.
It seems that surrogates are invisible to everyone once their wombs have done their job.

@toomuchlaundry
That is because the baby is being taken away from its birth mother (no dispute there) - not its ‘mum’.

There’s no difference to the baby.

That depends what you decide makes someone a parent. If there's no genetic link to the surrogate, is she mum? A dad is a dad, they don't need to carry the baby to be considered the parent, why is there a requirement for the mum to carry?

Biological father isn't always dad, a step parent etc can be said to be more of a dad than biological father because they are the one taking care of it. If it's handed over at birth from the surrogate to the legal mother and she looks after all its needs, is she not then mum by same definition?

The surrogate very much does not see herself as mum. She doesn't think its her baby, she has no intention of raising or looking after it.

Depends on what you think makes someone 'mum' and that will differ person to person.

@Youknownorhing It’s the emotive use of ‘being taken away from it’smum ‘ that makes the difference.

At the point of birth, to the baby that woman is mum and they care not a jot for what the intentions of other people are about their life.

Exactly! All these people wanting to claim to be the baby’s mum, when they are not.

They are the commissioning or adoptive parent, not the mum.

At the point of birth, to the baby that woman is mum and they care not a jot for what the intentions of other people are about their life.

No, you are sentimentalising this. Mum is a colloquial term.

Why does a mum have to give birth to be a mum but there are no such requirements on dad? Dad's can do jack shit and all fine? But oh no you didn't give birth so can't be a mum? Are you also someone that thinks giving birth by C-section makes you less of a mum because you 'didn't give birth properly'?

Precisely how do you know this? Do you have a telepathic connection to all babies to be able to speak for them?

What about the premature and sick babies that spend weeks in an incubator after birth? Are they also all traumatised for life because they can't be on the person that gave birth to them 24/7?

I think you will find on this thread, it is the women sentimentalising surrogacy
They have explained the baby is a last ditch attempt at happiness, a light into an otherwise hopeless miserable existence. The baby will be a blessing and bring light and joy into the world. The baby will cure a pain others couldn't possibly understand. But to the baby the fact remains, the woman who's voice and heartbeat they recognise is Mum and in any other circumstance it is recognised that Mum and baby should be kept together wherever possible as it is in babies best interests.

@Bathintheshed
No, this is simply a narrative that you have concocted. I think you will find that the surrogate mothers (rather than mums) who have spoken up on this thread were happy to hand the baby over. And then the baby bonds with the woman who the goes on to become its mum. And the baby is much loved. Or are we all lying, just because it doesn’t fit with your world view?

Potato potarto. Mum, mother…same thing.

When my children were born they sought me out, they looked for me and knew only me and were biologically disposed to draw themselves to me because I’d carried them for 9 months. Same for literally every baby.

Surrogate babies don’t magically know that the woman they perceive to be mum - like my kids did with me and you’re with yours - has been not deemed a mum by 2 other people. They don’t pop out saying “Hey it’s fine I know the score, you’re not mum, so of you pop please”. They expect, and more importantly they DESERVE to be with the woman who carried and gave birth to them - their mum

Literally no one has said this.

The point is TO THE BABY - remember, the second most important person in this joke of a process - considers the woman carrying them to be their mother.

Seriously go back and read the thread. Posters have said their life would not be worth living without using a surrogate, posters have claimed being a mother is a human right, read the thread.

Are you actually disputing basic biological knowledge? Do you think newborn babies magically know they’re surrogate babies?
The bond between a newborn and its mother is tremendously strong (even if it’s not immediately reciprocated), we are biologically disposed to have this bond. Who do you think they were expecting?

Re premature babies - yes it will be distressing for them to be separated from their mother, but it’s a situation where saving their life trumps that of not being separated. Much like with babies who are set to be adopted out. That baby won’t have a clue that its mother has been deemed unable to care for it, it will seek her out and expect to stay with her. However if a baby is being removed at birth, it’s because they are not safe with that mother and the need to be safe outweighs the need to not be separated.

Depends on what you think makes someone 'mum' and that will differ person to person.

It will differ from person to person but it is thankfully clear under the law, for the more formal term of 'mother'. A mother is a woman who gives birth, as recently confirmed by the McConnell case.

We could call surrogate mothers birth mothers/birth mums, as is done with adoption. I understand from reading the law commissions proposals that women who do engage in surrogacy agreements prefer 'surrogates' but because I find that dehumanising and dismissive I use surrogate mothers.

Birth mum works just as well, IMHO as this woman is the woman who gives birth to a child, like every other mother, and has legal rights and responsibilities for that child which continue beyond birth (which is why parental rights have to be transferred via adoption or parental order, approved by a judge).

Brilliantly put. 50% of the worlds parents don’t give birth and they are still parents?

@OhHolyJesus i have explained my connection. Feel free to send me a PM for me to give my name/address/bank details and send you a copy of my front door key.

Im leaving this thread and the poor OP.

Its like watching the anti-abortion protestors outside a clinic in the US. But who then do fuck all to help with the cost of raising a baby or medical care.

Do you all really think you’re going to stop someone doing surrogacy between 2 consenting adults by being total dicks?