The Baby Has Landed

[Sotiredsomuch]

Anyone watching?

I love stuff like this.

I think that there's a bit of homophobia about. I can't imagine a widower attracting the same vitriol

Where’s the vitriol?

No, absolutely not homophobic, I can assure you. My son is gay and we are very close. I don't care what people do or who their partners are. I would feel the same whoever the family was.

It was sad to see.

Mel sure as hell is their mother and it will come back to haunt her.

How patronising. And incorrect. She isn’t a child. She is an adult woman who already had children and knew her own mind. She isn’t their mother. They have a shared biological mother (the egg donor) and a biological father each.

Do you think a baby removed at birth and later adopted is the same as this situation then? Really.

I said adopted at birth.

Anyway- I think it’s clear we’re on two different wavelengths here and won’t agree. I’m happy to leave it there.

Its not patronising. What she did is just plain sad and wrong. For her.

You can’t possibly know or predict that. You’re projecting how you would feel about it onto Mel. Your feelings on it aren’t the “right” feelings. She’s entitled to feel differently than you would and that isn’t wrong.

@hifolks wrong for you but not wrong for her.

She explained on a previous episode why she offered to be a surrogate for them.

What I think is wrong with the surrogate story is the first episode when one of the men were discussing wanting a family when he knew he liked men. At first he was thinking about just pretending to like a women. Then at some point they wanted surrogacy but couldn’t decide on one ‘ journey’ or two. Surely the welfare of baby and surrogate was the most important thing instead of choosing a risky twin pregnancy which they did. Abroad too as it’s not encouraged over here (twin pregnancy).

I thought Mel came across very well. She obviously had her reasons for doing this and felt she would be able to cope with the magnitude of carrying twins and then giving them to their dads. I just felt for her when she cried in the lift as it appeared that she was trying to be matter of fact and not cry.

But no matter how much you tell yourself they aren’t your babies, it’s got to be traumatic to give birth, hand them over and then walk out of the hospital empty handed.

I hope we get an update from her and that she’s doing well.

It's not homophobic to say babies need a mother.

A mother? Or a woman parent?

My son doesn’t have a mum, he’s perfectly fine.

A mother? Or a woman parent? newborns need the vessel they grew in- 4th trimester

Wow I wasn't really expecting all these negative comments about surrogacy.
I don't think it's selfish. The babies will be loved. Everyone agreed cos they wanted to and I'm sure they all thought it through. Why would we not believe what Mel's saying?

newborns need the vessel they grew in- 4th trimester

So no adoption from birth then?

I don’t know if they will make great parents though, they already put the mother at risk by choosing to go for twins. They are having daughters as well.

If Mel was having those babies for her sister should she have kept them herself for the first 3 months?

Ideally not. Surely most babies adopted at birth are done so because there's no other option. And high levels of attachment problems/ primal wound.
This is a whole different ball game when it's deliberately set up so a couple of adults can get what they want, regardless of the biological needs of the children.

So what about Mels sister. If Mel had the babies for her, should Mel keep the babies with her for the 4th trimester? Which would undoubtedly prevent them bonding with the women who would be raising them.

We aren't discussing that hypothetical situation though. The circumstances on the programme are that 2 men have gleefully walked out the hospital without a backward glance, with twin girls that an unrelated woman has carried and delivered. There are no close familial connections in the way that a woman carrying a baby for her sister would have. It seems to go against basic biology, and I am sad for those babies.

Ideally not. Surely most babies adopted at birth are done so because there's no other option. And high levels of attachment problems/ primal wound
This is a whole different ball game when it's deliberately set up so a couple of adults can get what they want, regardless of the biological needs of the children.

I agree with this wholeheartedly.

We’re discussing “babies need a mother” and “the vessel they grew in” for the first 3 months.

Women having babies for their sisters isn’t a hypothetical scenario. It’s real. It’s happened. Should those women keep the babies for the first 3 months because they are the vessel they grew in? Preventing them from bonding and forming a secure attachment with the parent who will raise them?

So no adoption from birth then? Ideally no but life is far from perfect, like many have pointed out the comparisons to where a birth mother dies or can’t be with the newborn are entirely different

So what about Mels sister yes this would make me as equally sad for the baby who isn’t with its birth mother

without a backward glance

You mustn’t have watched the show. The men were in tears the whole way out to the car specifically about leaving Mel in the hospital alone.

Of course it's real, but it's not the scenario that is being portrayed here. Presumably if you carry a baby for your sister then you have a close relationship, there isn't such a brutal severing of handing a baby over to complete randoms to raise. I don't know which 'mother' should be the one to look after them, but I do think that in nearly every circumstance it is better for a child to have a mother than not. It's basic biology.