Parental order for donor embryo

[KazBuck]

Ok I was wondering if anyone can give me advice. I was thinking to use a surrogate with a donor embryo but when looking at getting a parental order the child must be biologically related to the intended parents… Surely there must be a way around this ? I know I should speak to a solicitor and I’m waiting on a call just wondered if anyone has any experience with this topic x

I’m not sure you’ll get much advice here. Lots of people have objections to surrogacy on mumsnet.

So you wouldn't be the genetic parent or the one actually pregnant with the baby? Have I misunderstood because I don't see how you'd be the parent

Assuming you are in the UK, no there is no way around this, it is written into the legislation see (1)(b) https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2008/22/section/54A?view=extent

Surrogacy laws may change in the future in the UK, but as things currently stand there is no way around this

Thank you Mia thank you for the information you have provided. For couples who are infertile and the woman is unable to carry a pregnancy but does not want to use the embryo of the surrogate for emotional reasons, it makes things very difficult. I think I have options but I was surprised that using a donor embryo is not a viable option x

No that’s correct technically, but if I carried a donor embryo I would be considered the biological parent. But if I used a surrogate to carry a donor embryo only she can have parental rights although she is not genetically related ….. Until you are in a situation where becoming a parent is fraught with problems you may not understand how hard things are. But being a parent to a child you are not genetically related is still being a parent !!!

Well that’s unfortunate people should not be so judgmental. When it’s your biggest dream to become a parent you will literally explore every possible option and others should try to be supportive in my opinion x

But being a parent to a child you are not genetically related is still being a parent !!!

It's the creation of a baby unrelated to either their surrogate or the intended parents that's the issue - surely there are newborns / very young babies who are in need of fostering or adopting? Why create an infant from scratch completely biologically unrelated to any of the adults involved?

Why don’t you consider adoption?

What you are talking about then is adoption, why not adopt a child already born? There are children in need of home including some from birth.

This is tricky legally as there's no link between you and the child - this is ordering a baby for later potential adoption I guess?

Then you can adopt and be a parent that way, there are other options. Sorry for your fertility struggles but this current law isn’t a bad thing.

Although not genetically related the surrogate would carry the baby's dna in her for life. There would be a link.

You are just wanting to adopt a baby if it'll have no genetic link to you? Why not get one that's already around, why do you need to create one and risk another woman's health and body?

So you just want to buy a newborn? One that isn't related to you or your partner? This is grim.

Leaving aside the moral objections to surrogacy please don’t just suggest adoption to women struggling with fertility - I endured this for years from my fertile friends and it gave me the absolute rage. “Just adopt” without any understanding of what adoption actually looks like is facile and offensive advice.

Normally id agree but this woman is already looking to adopt.

But adoption is what this person would be doing, except they are buying an embryo and renting a body to grow it in, like Mail order adoption. Kind of cutting the queue of going through all the adoption checks because you can afford to buy the baby. So your argument doesn’t really work for OPs case, I’d never say it it someone who couldn’t have biological children that wasn’t looking at this option.

But @BananaNirvana she wants to adopt a baby - she just wants to adopt one of her own choosing and timing. Adoption is exactly what she’s looking for.

I honestly get why you want this and I do have a lot of sympathy with wanting to have a baby and not being able to. One of the issues women have is that pregnancy and childbirth are still risky and surrogacy means paying a woman who has limited financial options, to take that risk for you. The industry of surrogacy has a lot of pretty ugly behaviour associated with it, particularly if you go to places where the intended parents have all the legal rights (which is tempting because it's safer for you) and the surrogate has little protection.
Then you get into the whole situation of how a baby bonds - think we are still discovering the importance of that.
These are the reasons why MN has a large number of posters who aren't in favour, but it doesn't mean that there isn't great sympathy for you or how hard it is for you.

Why should people automatically support the buying and selling of human beings?

Why are so many people who are anti surrogacy browsing around in the surrogacy section, are you all hoping someone with fertility issues who is desperate for a baby will come along so you can start slagging them off with nasty comments ?

That’s a little disingenuous - adoption is fraught with difficulties, dealing with children who potentially have a lot of issues and birth parents who may appear in their children’s lives when they’re older. OP’s option, while I don’t necessarily agree with it, would come with far fewer obstacles than an adoption.

Out of interest, what stops adoption being the preferred option for you?

I’m not actually infertile but have health issues, but thanks for the assumption and I don’t know what you know about adoption but that’s a very complicated process.