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.

Other than the fact I know lots of other surrogates and intended parents and see pictures of the babies every day?

Yes, that is called anecdotal evidence.

I genuinely don't understand what you mean by evidence?

Academic studies, statistics produced by one of the bodies you mentioned. That sort of thing.

Why would loss of earnings etc be seen as personal gain?

I'm not saying it is, I am just trying to get a handle on how 'not-for-profit' surrogacy works.

As much as you hear little about surrogacy there have been cases where the surrogate ends up out of pocket, so for some to claim its usual for surrogates to receive 18k in expenses is ridiculous, Expenses must be reasonable and justifiable.

Again you make these claims with no evidence to back it up other than somebody told you?

I am kind of interested to hear more about UK surrogacy too. Like Matilda said you have the sister/close friends type but what about 'stranger' surrogacy. Is it even a thing?

My crisps I'm sure there is probably that info out there, I'm just not sure how to go about finding it.

There are plenty of situations where there is no hard evidence. Surrogacy in the uk does not require legal services such as solicitors and is built on trust and friendship.

Yes, you might like to look at cots or surrogacy uk to see stranger surragacy exists and is most definitely a thing- that's not to say surrogates don't spend a reasonable amount of time getting to know their couple first.

Surrogacy in the uk does not require legal services such as solicitors and is built on trust and friendship.

Doesn't really mesh with

stranger surragacy exists and is most definitely a thing [even if you] spend a reasonable amount of time getting to know their couple first.

I'll have a look at the sites you mentioned.

Had a quick look at the application forms on Surrogacy UK

"Please confirm that you will pay expenses incurred before conception on an ad-hoc basis, and during the pregnancy on a monthly basis, usually between 5-10% per month, with the remainder once the baby is born"

Am I correct in understanding that means the surrogate only gets the vast majority of her expenses upon giving birth?

Yes that is the way cots do it. It's not something I agree with personally and can and does leave you out of pocket.

Yes that is the way cots do it. It's not something I agree with personally and can and does leave you out of pocket.

I never really considered UK surrogacy before, outside of the sister/friend scenario. So far from what I have read the whole thing sounds incredibly dodgy.

As much as you hear little about surrogacy there have been cases where the surrogate ends up out of pocket, so for some to claim its usual for surrogates to receive 18k in expenses is ridiculous, Expenses must be reasonable and justifiable.

That is the law, but it is not unusual for surrogates in the UK to receive 'gifts' from the IP, cars are I believe quite common.

But this is the UK which is different to India.

As for the likening to prostitution, well, in the Netherlands disabled people have a 'right' to a sex life. The state pays for someone to have sex with you if you want to and your disability makes it difficult to form relationships.

The people who provide the service are not referred to as prostitutes and see what they are doing as being altruistic, a thing that benefits the other person. But the bottom line is they are being paid to have sex.

Whether you feel it is dodgy or not, the fact is thousands of children have successfully been born through surrogacy since Kim cotton in the 80's.

I've never ever heard of anyone receiving a car!? Is that something you've read in some tabloid? (I can assure you that is fictional)
I did receive a gift, a beautiful bracelet....certainly not a car! Common gifts include jewellery, gift baskets, flowers etc.

A small holiday afterwards is permitted but if people received anything more than that they'd have a lot of explaining to do to the courts/cafcass!!

That's not a good enough reason to continue to exploit women.

Well maybe surrogacy in the UK does need more regulation then, to ensure that proper records are kept and that it remains altruistic and unpaid.

Under no circumstances however should a woman ever be in the position of having signed a legally binding contract to hand over a baby that they have given birth to unless they still want to after the birth. They should always have a right to change their mind.

And if the couple pull out. Well perhaps they should have to pay the expense money anyhow. But if expenses are done properly I don't think there will be that much to pay.

I can't see any merit in forcing them to take a child they don't want. Surely best at that point for the baby to be adopted. My understanding is there are many couples in the UK willing and able to give a home to a newborn.

What confuses me is that in the USA it isn't like here and it's much easier to adopt a newborn baby. But people still do surrogacy.
It's hard for adopters here so maybe that would help if it were easier.

MyCrispBag

I don't know what you mean and I don't think you can be bothered to respond properly - which is fine by the way, I'm not particularly interested. But clarity in the law would indeed reduce the potential for legal confusion, and this would give both parties entering into surrogacy in Britain more peace of mind. I'm not interested in your thinking it creates more arguments against surrogacy - the reality is that it does happen and should be regulated for properly.

Thexxed, not sure what you mean by that, U.K surrogates do not feel and are not exploited, surrogates abroad are.

All the toast, what makes you think proper records etc are not kept? They are by cafcass and the courts.

I and most of the surrogacy community disagree I'm afraid, the overwhelming majority of uk surrogates would like legal framework in place to ensure the intended parents are legally the baby's parents from birth. It's a safeguard for the intended parents and illiminates fuitloop "surrogates" exploiting/scamming IPs.

If a surrogate is unsure if she can handle handing over the baby at birth, frankly she has no place in the surrogacy world, a surrogates worst fear is the IPs not taking the baby for some reason.

And for the "go adopt" crew, it's not always that easy, people have been turned down for the smallest of reasons, it takes a considerable amount of time to go through the the adoption process, meaning often it's not a baby you're adopting. Also babies up for adoption are often from drug addicted mums etc or damaged in some way, it's a massive responsibility to agree to adopt imo, it's not for everyone.
I don't think it's unreasonable for IPs to desire a baby that's genetically theirs, just like some people spend thousands and thousands on trying to get their genetic baby through IVf .

But if expenses are done properly I don't think there will be that much to pay.

With respect, you are desperately under-informed. I have looked at many surrogate's expenses list and it is amazing the way it adds up. When you're carrying your own child, you may not notice it. But when it's someone else's child, it's different. Intended parents should mitigate every discomfort the surrogate and her family are faced with. So they pay for a weekly massage if there is back ache, or extra heating in the house in the run up to birth if the surrogate is at home more as a result of the pregnancy and it's winter time. They pay for help in the house, days out for the family if the surrogate feels it's necessary to compensate for the stresses of pregnancy, taxi runs to and from school, craft materials if the children are at home more, time off from work if the surrogate's husband or parents are looking after the children while she's at appointments. They reimburse for any time off work for the surrogate, all travel expenses and over the counter drugs/vitamins, maternity clothes and extra food.

When you're not carrying your own child, you look at the impact of the pregnancy upon your other children in a different way. Quite rightly, a surrogate is not prepared to feel that the children are missing out. They may be cared for differently during the pregnancy, but everything possible is done to ensure that the family is compensated for the stress and inconvenience of pregnancy. But it's different for every surrogate - no two expenses lists are the same. They run to an average of about £15 000 but that figure is rising.

What I find interesting about this thread is the conflict between the slightly antagonistic tone used by the majority of posters (who are against surrogacy) and the compassionate, altruistic concern for faceless 'poor' women who are assumed to be without choices and who must be protected from themselves. The compassion for their plight seems to disappear if the woman has a face and says 'I want to do x and I don't care if you have some high-minded reason for why I shouldn't be allowed to, I have as much right to decide this matter for myself as you have to make decisions about your own body.'

They run to an average of about £15 000 but that figure is rising.

Then maybe we need to ban this "altruistic" surrogacy too.

Someone who is genuinely doing something for altruistic reasons isn't inventing 15 grand's worth of "expenses".

You could live off that kind of money.

altruistic concern for faceless 'poor' women

Are you seriously suggesting that the women in the Indian surrogacy dorms aren't poor?

who are assumed to be without choices

Who are assumed to have difficult, terrible choices

and who must be protected from themselves

Who must be protected from rich foreigners who want to exploit them.

Bath time you have no idea. Expenses do range from 10-15k, but the vast majority sit somewhere between 8-12k, there are so many things you have absolutely no idea about....will, life insurance-for two years, maternity clothes, travel, loss of wages- sometimes both surrogate and her partner. The list of potential expenses is huge but no surrogate should suffer or go without whilst carrying someone else's child.

I'm guessing from the tone of your post you are one of them who for whatever reason(personal axe to grind?) feels surrogates should do it expenses less and tough if she's out of pocket. We do it out of love and compassion for our couples, but no one should be responsible for financially enabling someone else to have a baby.

Yes there have been cases it's gone above 15k but these cases involve surrogates who earn a hefty amount from the jobs they do eg lawyers for example, who've had to take considerable time off work maybe during pregnancy and afterwards to recover from a c sec for example. 15-18k is most definitely NOT the norm!

the total ignorance on this thread is amusing but illustrates why surrogacy gets a bad name, cars as gifts rotflmao!! I will continue to educate whether you agree with surrogacy or not!

And to add, again, U.K. Surrogates on the whole condem surrogacy abroad, it's not right, it's not easy, surrogates often get treated appallingly and when there are hundreds of uk surrogates we feel it's unnecessary.

Many IPs do it purely on the fact they are worried that with no legal framework the surrogate may keep the baby, that is ill informed and a poor reason to look abroad.

U.K. Surrogates on the whole condem surrogacy abroad, it's not right, it's not easy, surrogates often get treated appallingly and when there are hundreds of uk surrogates we feel it's unnecessary.

You feel it's "unnecessary" to face competition from cheaper surrogates abroad is how that reads to me.

£15,000 for surrogacy done out of "love" for a stranger?

Does that kind of money change hands to cover the costs of altruistic organ donation?

Does a sister carrying a baby for her sibling change that much?

Sorry, but anyone who has been pregnant in the UK knows that the expenses are nowhere near that level.

Unless you are doing it as a business, being pregnant does not cost £10K+

It's not altruistic if you are looking to be compensated for any possible expense to you or your family.

That is your opinion. One that I do not share.

Clearly.

Thanks for your contribution to the thread. You changed my mind.

I was in favour of what I believed to be genuinely altruistic surrogacy in the UK, although against the laws on reproductive rights being changed to accommodate something that should be rare and ad hoc.

Realising that tens of thousands of pounds are changing hands makes me realise that there is a surrogacy industry here too.

And I am not in favour of that.

To put perspective on it, it does not cost a ivf clinic 10k in expenses to transfer an embryo, yet they are allowed to charge those amounts. At least a surrogates expenses can be broken down and explained and the parents actually get their baby at the end of it, not just a slim shot at becoming pregnant for 10k.

Call it an "industry" if you like, makes no difference to me. I did it because I felt compassion for the couple who I carried for and feel privileged to be able to carry their baby for them and change their lives forever. I certainly didn't receive anywhere near 15k in expenses, or a holiday, or a car LOL.
The fact is we were asked our opinions on reform, we gave them but it could be years before any action is taken to reform surrogacy legalities. Meanwhile hundreds of couples welcome their new additions to the world, which is amazing.

It's understandable you don't agree with it if you have little knowledge or experience of it.