The mother of Tom Daley's child

[Pratchet]

Congratulations on a healthy baby! Hope the birth went safely and that you are recovering well.

I just hate surrogacy in case you can't tell

There's a tone on this thread that suggests that all babies deserve their mothers and that taking a baby away from its mother is child abuse. Do people saying this then think that a child cannot have/grow up with two dads and that they need a mother in their life?

Some people grow up without a mother for lots of reasons. We generally consider this a sad thing. Children can, of course, do well without a mother but I would imagine it is not easy. It’s never the ideal.

To deliberately deny a child the right to know its mother is not altruism, it’s evil.

When every single child in the world who doesn’t have a home has been adopted, come back to me and talk about surrogacy

I'm assuming you're against IVF as well?

Or, indeed, fertile people trying to conceive?

Lesbian mothers keep the baby they have carried. They also either use sperm donation that allows the child to find out their parentage by law, or a known donor who may be part of the child's life. But donating sperm isn't in anyway comparable to the process of growing, carrying and giving birth to a baby. The pretence that mothers are expendable to their babies and that everything should be gender neutral and equal in the cause of being 'right on', when reproduction is THE most unequal things there is between the sexes is so tiresome.

A friend of mine is currently going through IVF to be a surrogate, using a donor egg. The parents-to-be are paying for all medical fees but she is not earning anything from it herself, she just wants to see her friend and his husband become fathers. I couldn’t do it personally but if someone chooses to then that’s up to them. Perhaps the surrogate just wants some privacy rather than being constantly questioned about it. In fact it’s pretty rude of you to assume she just did it for the money.

My concern personally is the effect it would have on the baby’s health to be instantly taken away from their mother. Fourth trimester and all that.

@LunaTrap In the case of a family member carrying a child for biological parents - I honestly can't see a child being confused by that, or having issues with it, unless some other factors come into play.

There are many adults now raised by lesbian couples via sperm donors, I think there is evidence how many of them feel- I think for a lot there is interest in their biological origins, I imagine there are some who feel they missed out on having a father figure. I get the impression the majority are happy with their upbringing. I don't know if there are similar studies done on babies born through surrogates in different kinds of families, but my suspicion is that often in these cases it depends on whether the child feels they had a happy upbringing.

My family members who were adopted have no interest in their bio-parents because they feel their parents are their real parents and the biological link doesn't really matter. I know people born in difficult circumstances who think their parents probably should have had an abortion/given the up for adoption. Children will always judge their parents choices if they work out poorly for them.

I think there's two issues with what people are concerned about: one is the right of the child, the other the right of the women involved in surrogacy. I think all children disperse transparency about their biological origins, I'm cautious about saying 'children conceived in x set of circumstances shouldn't exist for their own sake' without evidence it's objectively true.

Regarding the women, I think in the majority of cases commercial surrogacy is damaging, and, possibly akin to prostitution, not a choice everyone can enter willingly. I can't say the same for altruistic surrogacy, and the arguments being made really do seem to take away the agency of all women who make that choice.

IWannaSeeHowItEnds

I see you didn't address my explanation of where the concept of "gestational carrier" comes from.

If think a term which is appropriate when used for pedigree livestock is appropriate for use about women then I have a very low opinion of you.

Luna I think that is fair. If we decide, as a society, that surrogacy is bad for the children, then it should be stopped. It's true that no one is considering how this child might feel and the only way to find out is when the child is grown and it's too late. Has anyone looked at how children born in this way have fared as adults?

We don't know what the long-term health issues are yet, Louise Brown isn't even middle-aged yet.

Lesbian couples having babies Ian not comparable. They are conceiving, growing, birthing and keeping the child they have made. The two cases I know have both used a sperm from a male friend who is known to the child and a part of its life.

All of you saying "you" don't like the exploitation of women's bodies it's not your body so back right off.

As a former "egg" donor I was not exploited, I was not paid and I'm not thick! I'm a strong empowered intelligent woman who gave the opportunity of a child/Children to 4 couples and a single woman over a period of several years.

If you have not donated or been a surrogate or suffered with the endless torment of infertility I think you should seriously think before you open your mouth and start shrieking about exploitation and what you actual know about it not what you think you know

Adding to that last thought- my friend who’s using the donor egg obviously won’t be biologically connected to the baby at all, and therefore not actually the ‘mother’ as such. But she is the womb that grew the baby and the voice the baby knows and the heartbeat that it will have heard whilst it was growing, and it’s obviously been proven to be damaging for babies to be away from their mothers for prolonged periods of time after birth even if they will be returning to the woman who birthed them afterwards (obviously with unwell babies it is necessary, and the benefits outweigh the damage by far, but it’s still distressing for them)

So - lesbians are permitted to have children on the proviso that they have a willing gay friend to father it, but gay men, no.

And that’s not homophobic at all.

Ok then

Fuck off looking for homophobia everywhere. It’s about putting the needs of an innocent child first, not two men whose biology doesn’t enable them to make babies.

And what a child needs are parents who love him.

I’m not going to fuck off. I’m not looking for homophobia. It’s right in front of me.

@hallie29 @slashlover
IVF or insemination using an egg or sperm donor - particularly an anonymous one - means choosing to deprive a child from the offset of at least one genetic parent.
I am totally against that, yes.
People underestimate genetics, it is terrifying for a small, non-verbal child to not recognise genetic features/mirroring of expressions in a caregiver. The trauma from this can last a lifetime.
It is horrible to not know either one or both sets of relatives.

I can see how horrific my adoptive mothers infertility was for her, but she would say the same too.
I have absolutely every sympathy for those who for whatever reason cannot conceive children, I really, really do.
If it were me, I would be in pieces.

However, no baby owes you happiness in these circumstances, tempting as I'm sure it is, it's not the solution.
Creating a child to bear your pain so you don't have to, is just not on.

Margaret equally you could say what about the genetic mother who is denied her baby because the surrogate, who freely entered into an agreement, has decided to withold someone else's baby?

Which is why people need to be really clear on what they are signing upto.

If it is the case that growing the baby has an impact on who that child becomes, then yes, we need to look more closely at this wrt surrogacy implications.

But as things stand, the baby was brought into the world purely because his dad's wanted him. The surrogate hasn't had her own child torn from her arms.

"Some people grow up without a mother for lots of reasons. We generally consider this a sad thing. Children can, of course, do well without a mother but I would imagine it is not easy. It’s never the ideal.

To deliberately deny a child the right to know its mother is not altruism, it’s evil."

I kind of get what you're saying, but I just feel bad for the gay fathers who are told that others feel sorry for their child because they don't have a mother, that their upbringing is not ideal, that it's sad that they don't have a mother. I guess it's because that would suggest that they're not enough

I think the purchase of women’s bodies is disgusting, whichever way you look at it. We are not disposable objects existing for the sole use of men or rich people. It’s sick, and the way this has been normalised in the media is sick. It worries me where this will head with the increase in transpeople who will be effectively infertile.

It’s homophobic to in effect state that you don’t think gay people should have children.

That is what you are saying. Sorry, but it is.

So - lesbians are permitted to have children on the proviso that they have a willing gay friend to father it, but gay men, no

And that’s not homophobic at all

A lesbian or a heterosexual couple who circumvent the UK laws and buy a "gestational carrier" are all equally as bad.

Is that clear enough for you?

British surrogate (aged over 50!) to gay couple - she went into it by choice (had already decided to do it before meeting them) & enjoyed it hugely.

She & the dads sound like lovely people. She is still part of their family & for all we know, this surrogate will be too.

www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/feb/02/i-was-a-surrogate-at-51-experience

So - lesbians are permitted to have children on the proviso that they have a willing gay friend to father it, but gay men, no.

And that’s not homophobic at all.

But a straight single man would be in the same situation, as would a heterosexual couple where the woman had had to have a hysterectomy (for example). Your argument is like people who say it's 'not fair' or 'sexist' that men and women don't have an equal say over abortion. Biology means you can't be 'fair' here and somehow make it equal between those that have wombs that can carry a child and those who can't. Which is desperately sad, but it is biological fact

And why aren't you equally concerned about the rights of gay couples who can't afford surrogacy? It's not like it's a universal right anyway - it's only there for those who can pay.

If a lesbian couple choose to have a child then one of them will get pregnant. No buying or selling involved.

Two gay men must rent a womb to have baby.

Thats fact not homophobia.

It’s homophobic to in effect state that you don’t think gay people should have children

That is what you are saying. Sorry, but it is

No one is saying that. Many posters are saying it is immoral and unethical for anyone to buy a "gestational carrier"

A lesbian or a heterosexual couple who circumvent the UK laws and buy a "gestational carrier" are all equally as bad.

This.