surrogacy, Julie Bindel is right, it is human rights abuse

[antimatter]

www.byline.com/project/43/article/820
and
www.byline.com/project/43

I have to say I didn't realise that surrogate clinics existed to provide service to rich foreigners.
It is exploitation on many levels.

1. Women who have had difficult pregnancies or births wouldn't be passed as surrogates.

I doubt this is true. However I will say again that pregnancy and birth has a cumulative effect on the body. The more births, the more damage to the pelvic muscles the greater risk of incontinence and prolapse.

Also the past is no guide to the future. Babies 1 and 2 could come out fine. Baby 3 might cause a life altering tear or a life threatening retained placenta or infection.

Also are you saying that because women who are concerned about exploitation and coercion and happen to be middle class are being patronising?????? I don't understand how you managed that reach.

TheXxed are you seriously comparing the service these women are providing to slavery?!

Jesus, slaves had no choice in their situation! To compare the two is actually unbelievable.

And before you shout about me not understanding, my family were brought over as slaves to the West Indies. My mother is black, but I don't see that this has any relevance to the thread.

I wanted to engage in intelligent debate, but this has pissed me off.

Enjoy the rest of the conversation.

Frank the desire to live is very strong too and I bet stronger than the desire for a baby but paying for organs is illegal.

That primal desire to have a baby is so strong, and the desperation of infertility is incredibly acute!

So what?

The desire not to die is incredibly acute, but it wouldn't be OK for me to take organs from people who were paid for them.

Even if selling those organs provided money for a child's education.

But how patronising of us not to support the world's poor being exploited for body parts so we can fulfil our "strong desires".

I WATCHED THE VIDEO GIVEN BY THE CLINIC AND IT SHOWED THAT THE WOMEN ARE HAVING A WONDERFUL TIME AND LOVE IT SO WHAT'S THE PROBLEM?

Frank, many people have in the past sold themselves into slavery to pay debts or sold their children into slavery to buy food? Is it patronising to suggest that they not be allowed to make this choice?

I would suggest that surrogacy and slavery are linked because they both relate to things that should never be for sale.

A short list of things that I think shouldn't be sold.

1 People
2 People's organs
3 Women's bodies to bear children
4 People's bodies for sex

All the toast, I agree entirely with your list.
But, I would sell a kidney to get my child away from an abusive, peodophile husband.

I would also carry someone else's child, if it paid me enough money to pay for medicine to save my child's life.

These would all be my choices.

The desire to keep my child alive, trumps my own life.

And whilst I would hate every second of it, I would prostitue myself to educate my child.

Until we educate our sons and daughters that this is NOT ok, these abuses will continue, and women will do whatever they can for their families.

Frank of course, many women ( including me) would also prostitute themselves to feed a hungry child if there was no other option, does that mean prostitution should be legal or encouraged?

But, I would sell a kidney to get my child away from an abusive, peodophile husband.

Yes, lots of people would.

That's why it is so very illegal.

Because exploiting that impulse is very wrong.

Buying someone's kidney, or renting their womb and then buying their baby, is not "their choice" if they are making it out of desperation.

You are exploiting them.

You are using your "desperation" to have a baby to justify using their desperation to keep their children fed and safe against them.

It is immoral.

Really, really wanting something and being rich doesn't give you the right to use other humans in that way.

8. Women are quizzed carefully about the freedom of their choice and their fee is not released to them directly but instead is released to pay a mortgage for a house in their name, or to a college or bank if it's a start-up business.

Now that is patronising.

I've got kids. I'm privileged, I have many choices available to me. If this changed, and I had to keep a roof over my kids heads, or there was a way that I could give them a push that could get them a significantly better life than the way mine was heading, I would sacrifice much of myself to do that. I can understand how a poor woman, wanting to give my kids a home would go and do this. She would understand what she was doing, but it's exploitation. 100% exploitation. Rich paying the poor to risk themselves, taking total control and then taking the baby. It's abhorrent.

I see many other people have said the same thing while I was typing that!

wanting to give their kids a home

obviously.

Then I guess I would be happy to be exploited, if it were my choice. Legal or not.

But I cannot view this as slavery, as I've made the choice of my volition, regardless of the reason. Slaves did not.

Frank people sell themselves into slavery to save their children from inheriting their debt which is taken out to give their kids a better life in the first place. Because they are doing it to save their kids should that me allowed too? It is a very slippery slope. No one should be allowed to buy anyone else's body.

I agree with you, OP.

And I say that as a childless 42-year-old woman who would desperately love a baby. But I wouldn't use another woman's body for it.

FrankUnderwoodsWife no you weren't looking for intelligent or robust debate you were trying to justify the indefensible. You began the identity politics Olympics by bringing up the pain of infertility and the middle class patronising nonsense.

Coldest, no one should be allowed to buy another persons body, but when you have women willing to sell theirs, what is the answer?

If you ban it, you drive it underground where women are further exploited. How do we address these issues?

As women, we should support women who are vulnerable, and making these choices. Campaign to legalise, and closely monitor, these horrific and uncomfortable situations women globally are facing daily.

Let's keep them safe, healthy and ensure they're educated about the choice they are making.

Sorry I'm not being very succinct and articulate this morning! Late night, child with gastric flu. I know what I'm trying to say, just not verbalising it properly.......

I think that you control the people with power/money buying these women's bodies.

You make it socially unacceptable to buy a baby, you prosecute people found to be buying a baby.

Legalising exploitation just makes it more acceptable.

As women, we should support women who are vulnerable, and making these choices.

Do you listen to yourself you want to support women by making their commodification easier?

They tried the same thing in Germany with prostitution and shockingly making it easier to purchase women's bodies has made women more unsafe than they were previously. shocking I know.
www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/02/if-you-think-decriminalisation-will-make-prostitution-safe-look-germanys-mega

If you ban it, you drive it underground

Ah, the apologists' get out.

We can't ban things because people will do them anyway.

So instead of spending our resources policing what is wrong, we give it The imprimatur of legalisation and then spend time making sure people are exploited "safely".

By that argument we should legalise slavery, rather than drive it underground where slaves are at increased risk.

Let's have it all above board and spend our time regulating it so the slaves are safe.

This will, of course, be massively beneficial to the slave owners and traders.

But that's all OK. Only safety matters. As long as people are "safe" it doesn't matter how shit their lives are.

Green, a genuine question.
Do you believe surrogacy should be banned globally then? Regardless of the country of origin of the surrogate? Or is it just in third world countries that we will ban the use of surrogates?

I'm not going to defend Indian surrogacy. I don't know if I would allow it or not, if the choice was mine. What I will say is that I think it's right to regulate it now it's happening, and I think that for many (not all) Indian woman who have been surrogates, the sad economic reality of the world we're living in means that very few of our (or their) choices are truly 'free' and within that context, surrogacy has positively impacted their lives.

We didn't use a surrogate from another country so I don't have first hand experience.

A woman is as able to weigh up the decision to be a surrogate as she is to have another child. I personally wouldn't take that decision away from her, presume she can't choose because the money would be too useful to her, or suggest that you need to be able to read in order to know about pregnancy (although women in that class generally can read and the assumptions on the thread about the natives capacities are irritating). So I don't particularly like it, but I wouldn't stop them doing it. I can see that fit many women it's a positive thing overall and I would regulate the industry, rather than waste time trying to ban it altogether.

All commercial surrogacy ( uk it already is) should be illegal and the expenses system should be tightly regulated so it cant be commercial in all but name.