What is this board for?

[powotsits]

I clicked on a thread yesterday that came up in the main section of the site.

I’ve not been on this board before and wasn’t aware of it.

What’s it for?

Without looking I would have imagined it was a space for anyone involved in (in any capacity) or considering surrogacy to find support and information.

Instead it seems to function as a bait for people who have exhausted ivf and are looking into other options, who arrive at a board patrolled almost exclusively by people who are vehemently opposed to surrogacy as a general concept and regularly check the board for new posters to badger, having no actual interest in surrogacy themselves. It functions as an anti-surrogacy board, but is not signposted as such to unwitting posters.

Am I missing something? Why is this board here? It is a very dark corner of the site.

But no sympathy for the poor, vulnerable the op would potentially exploit to get what they want? Or sympathy for the poor baby taken away from the mother he/she has bonded with in utero?

I think there’s a very good argument to challenge Mumsnet on having this board at all.

Points I would happily discuss on a different thread. I just feel that the surrogacy board should be a safe space for those who are considering it to have a much more gentle conversation.

I would just let the board die quietly.

If mumsnet really cared they'd put a disclaimer saying that there are people with an agenda who stalk this board and if you would like info on surrogacy go somewhere else. It's not a safe place for vulnerable women to ask for advice.

Surely it is better to discuss the reality of surrogacy before they go on to exploit vulnerable women? The agencies involved paint a very pretty picture and if commissioning parents are only exposed to that side of the practice that are not making an informed decision.

Being vulnerable due to infertility does not justify exploiting women who are significantly more vulnerable.

FAOD I agree with you on surrogacy. But if MN has decided to have the board at all then I don’t think individuals’ threads are the right place for the debate. It’s a bit like when the occasional anti-abortion campaigner pops up on a thread where someone is considering one- they may sincerely believe they are right but it’s not the appropriate place for the debate. They tend to make similar arguments to the ones you are making here about having the right to express their views.

Getting rid of the surrogacy board altogether would be a reasonable option.

Someone who is thinking of having an abortion needs to make a considered decision that considers the full implications of her decision. I would always advocate non directive counselling for any woman who is unsure, and if she is posting for advice here, she is obviously at least a little unsure. Abortion is the right choice for some women in some circumstances and the wrong choice for other women in similar circumstances.

The same logic regarding an informed decision applies to surrogacy. The difference with surrogacy is that there is a sweetness and light narrative that is peddled about surrogacy where there are no victims and everyone is a winner. Many commissioning parents have no idea of the physical risks a surrogate takes. They have no idea why a surrogate would actually choose to do this (her body, her choice is frequently argued) and how it is frequently her only option to provide for her family. They need to know the reality before making a decision.

I think that its important for people to see both sides of the surrogacy debate, they aren't going to get any honest opinions from their family and friends or in some cases the agencies that either have an agenda or are making money from the arrangement. People considering using an overseas surrogate should hear how some of the women that are used are actually treated and the potential issues they face.

I wasn’t aware that MN has this topic and feel quite shocked that it would support the commercialisation of babies and the exploitation of women in this way. It’s absolutely right that it’s challenged imo.

Commercial surrogacy is illegal in the UK so it’s not really relevant.

And if you look through you’ll see posts where people in the UK acting as volunteer surrogates are piled on and harassed as well. It’s a red herring / straw man argument for hounding posters here.

If someone is talking specifically about commercial surrogacy that’s a different question and not applicable to this board generally

Volunteer surrogates or commercial - the difference is often moot as even "volunteers" get expenses and sometimes people are coerced into doing it by family.

But whatever the motivation, it doesn't change the fact that the baby is removed at birth, often growing up without the birth mother. We know from adoption practice how damaging this is but surrogacy proponents don't acknowledge it never mind do anything about it.

And all surrogacy is part of a global industry, which includes unwanted babies being discarded, babies being handed over to paedophile with no questions asked, women's bodies being controlled and exploited, eugenics being carried out, babies aborted on the say so of the prospective purchaser, women being abandoned to deal with the physical and emotional aftermaths, illiterate women, maybe with special needs, not understanding what they are getting into.....

Imo the term "volunteer" surrogacy is doing a lot of heavy lifting and is used to conceal what most of the market looks like.

An agency here which has just opened an office in Mexico says on their website that they don't take on people looking for UK volunteer surrogates as they barely exist. No, the market for exploited women is in Mexico etc.

I also think it would be more appropriate to challenge MN on this directly rather than posters in the thick of ivf asking for other people’s experiences of surrogacy.

The tone of the posts is obscene and derogatory – telling people their lifestyles have led to an inability to have children and they should suck it up.

The keyboard warriors have a very narrow agenda that apparently blinds them to the fact they are speaking to real humans. The top of the page does state specifically that the board is intended “to connect with others in similar situations and discuss legal processes, costs, well-being, and types of surrogacy.”

So anyone harassing posters is deliberately flouting this and using the space for their own completely separate agenda

I am not involved in surrogacy in any way but saw a thread this week in active threads that was very ugly. The poster described being exhausted and heartbroken by the ivf process and was hounded off her own thread for asking on the surrogacy board what people’s experiences of surrogacy were. Some of these morally self-righteous posters were also very insulting and derogatory about her subfertility.

I would bet money that close to none of them lift a finger in real life to help such people in any meaningful way.

The vast, vast majority of people in the UK use commercial surrogates in countries where it is legal. So yes, it is very much relevant to this board.

Also, MN is not a UK only site so some posters will live in countries where commercial surrogacy is legal. So again, very relevant discussion.

I couldn't have children and adopted 2 older, neglected children from the UK care system. I don't believe that infertility is in any way a reason to exploit another woman or to remove a baby at birth. I am against US style baby adoption for money too. In my experience, dna matters. Adoption should only be used in exceptional cases like severe neglect and it has to be about the child, not the adults.

Having said that i would not harangued individuals for their personal choices. I met a man who had 3 children by "altruistic surrogacy" with his gay partner recently and I said nothing.

Commercial surrogacy is illegal in the UK so it’s not really relevant.

But nothing to stop British couples/individuals using foreign surrogates in a commercial agreement and bringing the baby here though? Like the awful stories around the Ukrainian surrogates when Russia invaded.

I agree that MN should be challenged. I imagine they will remove posts that break talk guidelines - they’re usually pretty good at doing that - but there will be posters who express their horror and disgust at the process in a robust way and that’s ok imo. It’s an open forum and it’s a very emotive topic which involves separating babies from their mothers at birth for no good reason. No-one should be able to buy a human being.

there will be posters who express their horror and disgust at the process in a robust way and that’s ok imo. It’s an open forum

That is really not what this board is for and people morally opposed to surrogacy should not be haunting these threads telling people who have quite rightly asked a question about surrogacy on a surrogacy board they are ‘morally repugnant people traffickers’

Most or many of the people seeking advice here will be on a challenging fertility journey and know very little about the topic. Attacking them ‘in a robust way’ is completely inappropriate and not what the board is here for

While I agree with you that attacking individual posters is not appropriate, it is appropriate to paint the reality of what is involved in surrogacy, particularly commercial ones, as the vast majority of surrogacies are commercial. Vulnerable women are being exploited to satisfy the wants of the commissioning parents. A baby is being removed from the woman he/she has bonded with over the course of the pregnancy.

The agencies paint a happy clappy picture of surrogacy with the surrogates depicted as selfless angels who only want to help. That is not the reality and if you are going to avail of surrogacy you should be aware of the reality.

I disagree with you on the purpose of the board. The board refers to discussions on well-being. Surely the well-being of the surrogate and the baby are priorities?

That discussion earlier this week was horrible. I am against commercial surrogacy, but jumping on a thread started by someone in such obvious emotional pain is just grim.

I agree. Surrogacy is hugely exploitative and involves taking babies away from their mothers at birth. The damage that does to both in the short and long term cannot be underestimated and should be shown for what it is. Infertility is awful and I understand the desperation it brings, but babies and wombs are not commodities to be bought - anyone contemplating buying a human needs to know exactly what they are participating in.

I don’t agree with personal attacks but it is right that surrogacy is challenged. I can’t see much of a difference between ‘altruistic’ and commercial surrogacy.
I’d rather not see it on the boards at all but I’m probably in the minority

Honestly, there should be no safe space to discuss surrogacy. It is human trafficking and currently campaigned against across the globe. It is also being investigated by the UN as exploitation.

Trying to make it palletable as a way of assuaging the feelings of people struggling to conceive is also not acceptable. A large majority of UK citizens use surrogates from poorer countries to meet their needs. This is totally unacceptable and abhorrent.

This is a good paper written by Stop Surrogacy Now UK campaign submitted to the Houses of Parliament. It puts a compelling case to ban all forms of Surrogacy in the UK.

https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/129035/pdf/

The calls for complete global ban are growing thankfully. It looks like momentum is growing and possibly Labour may have the appetite to take this issue on.

I don't agree with personal attacks but it's not right that there is a board dedicated to promoting this practice. Mumsnet really need to rethink this.

I think you really need to contact mumsnet directly to express your opinion on that.

Personal attacks on individual posters is exactly what I’m talking about, and the board is full of it. So on the basic contention of this thread we are in agreement.

I agree with everything you said except "A large majority of UK citizens use surrogates from poorer countries to meet their needs."

They are not needs. They are wants or desires.