Surrogacy in the UK

[ChangeYourStars]

Hi! My husband and I had a difficult journey to build our small family, and have been medically advised to look for surrogacy to complete our family. We are relaxed, happy and grateful to have experienced parenthood – and excited at the prospect of building a lifelong relationship with a surrogate and her family. I guess I question whether a surrogate would actually want to help IPs with kids? Welcome the surrogate perspective on this question please!

• Intended parents, London, UK

PS. No haters please; everyone has their own journey

Given the surrogacy laws in the UK I'd think very carefully about whether this is the best course of action for you

You can't dictate what responses you get
You've got a child. What makes you think you're entitled to use another woman's body to have another one?

@Beeeeeeeeeeeeeep why would you say such a thing?

People on here can be so nasty.

[quote lulugee]@Beeeeeeeeeeeeeep why would you say such a thing?

People on here can be so nasty.[/quote]
Because I believe it? Because surrogacy is morally wrong? Because I can? Mumsnet is an open forum.

Why on earth is there a Surrogacy topic when people have had to ask for a disability topic?

@IHaveBrilloHair

Why on earth is there a Surrogacy topic when people have had to ask for a disability topic?

That is an excellent question

I'm sorry it was difficult for you, presumably you now have a child but would like more. Nothing wrong with an only child having all your attention lavished on it. Isn't it better to enjoy the child you have than put yourself through all the difficulties and expense of using a surrogate mother to have another?

You say you want a lifelong relationship with the surrogate mother and her family. No doubt some surrogate mothers also want that. But consider the reasons why. In the recent BBC3 series The Surrogates the young mother Emma definitely appears to want that from her commissioning parents. She appeared to be a rather lonely and vulnerable single mother who welcomed a gay couple and the opportunity for them to provide male company to her young son. I hope that does continue well for her and her son. But in many ways such a relationship for you would be more akin to acquiring a grown up daughter as well as a new baby. Quite needy. Which is perhaps what drew her to surrogacy.

Of course other surrogate mothers are clear they want to hand over the baby and consider their job done. They may not want an ongoing relationship. It is clear that even though, in theory, surrogacy in the U.K. is altruistic, but "expenses" of £15k or in some cases topping £20k suggest money is a major motive.

The Times recently featured a woman who has had seven surrogate pregnancies in eight years, even carrying on after she nearly died with the fifth, needing a spell in ICU and a four litre blood transfusion. I can't imagine she is putting her body through this to form lifelong relationships with seven other families. And of course if she had died the relationship of the commissioning parents with her orphaned children would surely be difficult.

I suggest you concentrate on the child you have and research widely. Surrogacy isn't the lovely flufffy thing portrayed by the media.

I've been curious about this as I've seen some other threads in the past.

Is there no room for surrogacy as an option at all then? If people can't carry their only children, for whatever reason, should the only alternative be adoption?

Not looking to get flamed but I feel that people are so strongly against surrogacy as if it shouldn't be an option at all.

Are there no circumstances in which it should be an option? Do you think that there's no way a surrogate can choose to participate in the process freely?

I am a U.K. based surrogate and know several others.

I’m going to try not to further open the much-hashed ethical debate on the rights and wrongs of surrogacy (covered in other threads), but instead I will answer the OPs question and provide my perspective.

Based on my experience:

• Some surrogates delight in creating families, and definitely do prefer working with childless IPs.
• However for many surrogates, the choice of which IPs to work with is defined by other factors too numerous to list, and I know many who have had second or subsequent children for IPs.

So the answer is that there definitely are some surrogates out there willing to work with IPs who already have one or more children.

Surrogacy is undoubtably hard work - it is complex, expensive, can be emotionally draining, and overall requires a great deal of thinking, planning and trust in order to be successful. It sounds like you are at the very early stages of thinking about surrogacy, so please do lots of research and heart-searching. As you are probably already aware, whilst surrogacy itself is legal, it is illegal to advertise for or to be a surrogate in the U.K.

Medically advised to use a surrogate - reeeeeally? A UK doctor is suggesting you use another woman's body to have another child? It is wholly unethical.

If you want more children then adopt or foster, plenty of kids need homes. You don't need a biological link to a child to love them.

Plenty of parents don’t see their family as ‘incomplete’ having had one child- why is it the case for you that you don’t feel ‘completed’ until you have more than one?

By the way - the use of the word surrogate is completely backwards. In fact you would be the surrogate. The woman who carried the baby would be the mother.

@mrstea301

I've been curious about this as I've seen some other threads in the past.

Is there no room for surrogacy as an option at all then? If people can't carry their only children, for whatever reason, should the only alternative be adoption?

Not looking to get flamed but I feel that people are so strongly against surrogacy as if it shouldn't be an option at all.

Are there no circumstances in which it should be an option? Do you think that there's no way a surrogate can choose to participate in the process freely?

Frankly, no A baby is not a right. Creating a baby with the express intention of separating it from its mother at birth is morally wrong. It harms babies. Not to mention it is an inherently exploitative action, and rife for the most horrendous abuse and consequences to vulnerable women and children.

I don't think mumsnet is the right place for your question, a lot of us are very against the practice, myself included so you're likely to encounter "haters".

Personally I think it's unfair on the child, they're ripped away from the one person they have a bond with, I wouldn't want that for my child. Not to mention the exploitation and commodification of potentially vulnerable women.

I think it can be a lovely thing to do for someone you care about, but I still would worry about the potential effects on the baby.

@sqirrelfriends of course she should be able to ask the question. The surrogacy board is under the ‘becoming a parent’ section of the site and those considering becoming parents in this way should be able to ask questions without being flamed. Like it or not surrogacy is legal in the UK.

Do you think it would be fair if pro lifers hung around the pregnancy choices board to shame women considering abortions?

There are other areas on mumsnet to discuss views on surrogacy, but those seeking practical advice should be able to ask on this board without judgement.

[quote CP26]@sqirrelfriends of course she should be able to ask the question. The surrogacy board is under the ‘becoming a parent’ section of the site and those considering becoming parents in this way should be able to ask questions without being flamed. Like it or not surrogacy is legal in the UK.

Do you think it would be fair if pro lifers hung around the pregnancy choices board to shame women considering abortions?

There are other areas on mumsnet to discuss views on surrogacy, but those seeking practical advice should be able to ask on this board without judgement.[/quote]
Surrogacy == abortion though

@CP26 I don't disagree with her posting it, I just don't think she will get the responses she is looking for on mumsnet.

@Beeeeeeeeeeeeeep some people consider abortion ethically wrong even though it’s legal. As with surrogacy. But whatever your views I think you should be respectful of people’s choices. It’s not as if it is being rammed down your throat, this is literally the surrogacy board and you and the other posters must actively check it to see have seen this thread. Why bother?

[quote CP26]@Beeeeeeeeeeeeeep some people consider abortion ethically wrong even though it’s legal. As with surrogacy. But whatever your views I think you should be respectful of people’s choices. It’s not as if it is being rammed down your throat, this is literally the surrogacy board and you and the other posters must actively check it to see have seen this thread. Why bother?[/quote]
Nope it popped up in active
Abortion and surrogacy are entirely different and respecting someone's choice to terminate a pregnancy is completely different to respecting someone's choice to exploit a woman and harm a child.

[quote lulugee]@Beeeeeeeeeeeeeep why would you say such a thing?

People on here can be so nasty.[/quote]
Why is it nasty? No one has the right to exploit a woman’s body.

@IHaveBrilloHair

Why on earth is there a Surrogacy topic when people have had to ask for a disability topic?

Because it was asked for.

Just like the disability board is being asked for and just like many many other topics.

@mrstea301

I've been curious about this as I've seen some other threads in the past.

Is there no room for surrogacy as an option at all then? If people can't carry their only children, for whatever reason, should the only alternative be adoption?

Not looking to get flamed but I feel that people are so strongly against surrogacy as if it shouldn't be an option at all.

Are there no circumstances in which it should be an option? Do you think that there's no way a surrogate can choose to participate in the process freely?

Yes, the only other option should be adoption. Babies are not commodities to be traded in. They are living, breathing human beings, not puppies.

I can't get worked up about this really. Surely a surrogate enters into the agreement because they are happy with the arrangement. No one is exploiting anyone?
It does seem to be becoming a trend for wealthy people though!