Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

So upset by commercial surrogacy

203 replies

Soggiemoggie · 18/12/2018 12:02

Considered posting this in AIBU but thought I might get some deeper more sympathetic discussion here...

I know it's a topic that really splits views but I am so upset to hear about distant family friend who has adopted a baby through commercial surrogacy in the US (they live here in the UK). DM told me a about this a few months ago and this week said she's seen photos of the baby and another family friend has visited them. DM has expressed (privately to me) that she thinks it is a horrible thing for the baby and that is equates to buying and selling of women's bodies. I wholeheartedly agree with this view. They happen to be a gay couple and before anyone calls me homophobic - I don't care a jot about that and it doesn't change my view at all that this is such an entitled and selfish act. I don't believe it is a human right to have a baby and if you can't have children of your own for whatever reason, why not look into adoption or fostering for the many children who are already in this world and in dire need of a loving family and secure home?

Anyway when my DM mentioned it again this week and I asked how old the baby was now and when she answered, for some reason I just burst out crying in front of DM and DF. So embarrassing (!) But I just had this overwhelming upset feeling thinking about the baby away from his mum and his mum who god knows how she must be feeling.

I myself have a 8 month old DS (PFB...) so obviously such strong feelings about this are because of my own bias about being a mum to a helpless tiny baby and having my whole universe revolving around DS...

So Mumsnetters please share your views on commercial surrogacy, tell me it's OK to be distraught at the thought of this, or tell me to piss off for being so judgey...

Sorry this is so long - I really needed to get that off my chest!

OP posts:
explodingkitten · 18/12/2018 15:47

But the child is with the parents. An adopted child is away from it's parents. Surrogacy means that the surrogate is carrying the couples child. It's not biologically her child. It's the sperm and egg of the parents, the surrogate "only" carries it till term. It's not her baby, she is not it's mother.

I fail to see how you have a problem with surrogacy but are OK with adoption.

explodingkitten · 18/12/2018 15:50

I am against commercial surrogacy though, but if a friens or sister is willing to carry the other womans child then I don't think that there is anything wrong with it.

Hothouseorflophouse · 18/12/2018 15:52

I think what makes surrogacy quite stark is the reasons why it's often a different egg donor to the carrier in these sort of situations. Gestational carriers (for want of a better expression) are usually poor, ill-educated, 'sturdy', already mothers. Egg donors are usually tall, graduated-educated or higher, blonde etc. In other words the genetic material comes from someone very different to the one who puts in the whole nine months.

That makes me feel a bit ick.

SnuggyBuggy · 18/12/2018 15:53

Try telling that to a fourth trimester newborn. I get that sometimes there is no choice to place a child for adoption but it doesn't seem right to deliberately engineer that situation.

Thestral · 18/12/2018 15:59

It appalls me.

Until rich western white women are choosing to also be "altruistic" surrogates, it's proof that it's just exploitative capitalism at best.

People should not be for sale.

makingmiracles · 18/12/2018 15:59

@hestia

There is actually a very strict list of requirements to be a surrogate in the USA, the surrogate cannot be on any state help food tokens or Medicaid

TwistedStitch · 18/12/2018 16:00

It's not her baby, she is not it's mother.

She is the biological mother. She has grown every part of that baby with her body, created a symbiotic relationship with them, given birth to them. Trying to claim that the woman who grows, carries and gives birth to a baby is not it's mother because an egg of different genetics is used is attempting to reduce the role a pregnant woman plays in reproduction to that of men, gamete supply. It's this kind of thinking that allows women to be used as incubators, referred to as gestational carriers etc.

53rdWay · 18/12/2018 16:03

It's not her baby, she is not it's mother.

But it is, she is. With the exception of the sperm cell from the father and the egg cell from the donor, every part of that baby has been grown inside her body. As soon as the placenta started working it’s been her own blood supply nourishing and growing it. She’s not just a cardboard box it happens to have been temporarily stored in until it was ready to collect.

It has a genetic mother (who is often not the intended mother either, it’s common to have a donor egg for surrogacy) and it has a mother who will raise it. That doesn’t stop the one who carried and grew and birthed it also being a mother.

pfwow · 18/12/2018 16:12

I fail to see how you have a problem with surrogacy but are OK with adoption
I don't have a problem with surrogacy in all cases, but it's totally different to being ok with adoption. Adopting means taking on a child who is already there, and giving them hopefully a better life than they would have with their birth parents. It's not the same as creating a child.

BIWI · 18/12/2018 16:18

Your son would be lucky to have any child, baby or not. Yes adoption is difficult. So is conceiving for many, so is pregnancy and raising children. That’s not an excuse to use women as incubators.

I never said anything about using women as incubators Hmm

And why should my son not have the same 'right' to have a baby as anyone else, just because he's gay? Conceiving and pregnancy isn't just difficult for him, it's impossible!

stackhead · 18/12/2018 16:21

"And why should my son not have the same 'right' to have a baby as anyone else, just because he's gay? Conceiving and pregnancy isn't just difficult for him, it's impossible!"

No one has the right to a child. In that case your son has exactly the same rights as anyone else.

WallyTheWasher · 18/12/2018 16:21

Yep I don’t approve of commercial surrogacy at all. And it’s probably one of those things you’re not meant to say but buying a baby is wrong and I won’t not think or say it just cos it’s not “PC”. I couldn’t care less about being called -phobic any more, it’s so old.

SnuggyBuggy · 18/12/2018 16:27

No man has the right to father a child.

mouthkisses · 18/12/2018 16:27

Yes, upsetting. I find it hard to get past the removal of a newborn from its mother. I think it's unethical unless for the greater good of the child.

I agree with the above poster who suggested we should challenge any 'right' to a biological child. No matter what gender, sex or sexual orientation.

OrchidInTheSun · 18/12/2018 16:29

Because he's a man BIWI and men can't have children.

I feel very strongly that not only the needs of the biological mother glossed over but also the needs of the baby. I actually wish more countries would implement HFEA rules and that would stop the exploitation of poorer women in developing countries. I think any child born to a surrogate should have that noted on their birth certificate, as should any child who is donor conceived, regardless of whether or not the donor is in the U.K.

The needs of the child must come before those of any potential parent and that is not currently the case a lot of the time.

Branleuse · 18/12/2018 16:29

nobody has the right to have a child. Pregnancy and childbirth is one of the riskiest things a woman can go through. It shouldnt be on the market to be exploited

TwistedStitch · 18/12/2018 16:40

And why should my son not have the same 'right' to have a baby as anyone else

Nobody has the 'right' to anything that relies upon the use of somebody else's body to get it- be they gay, straight, man or woman.

Pennydrew142 · 18/12/2018 16:53

And why should my son not have the same 'right' to have a baby as anyone else, just because he's gay?

Nobody has any such ‘right’. Plenty of heterosexual people cannot have children too. Plenty of people want things they cannot have. This attitude of entitlement, particularly when it’s concerning children, is a very serious problem in society.

mmgirish · 18/12/2018 17:02

I live in SE Asia. Last year my nanny came to me and told me she was leaving our family after 3 years to become an illegal commercial surrogate (donor egg not hers).

I urged her not to do it. Not because she was leaving us but because it was illegal and I was worried about the long term effects of carrying a baby for 9 months then the trauma of handing it over. There had been several high profile surrogacy cases here that had gone wrong in one way or another in the media here which led to it being banned.

However, the couple (a gay male couple from Australia) had offered her 4 times her annual salary to carry this baby. They would also match the monthly salary we were paying her too so she could live off that without working during her pregnancy. Her giving up work was a feature of their agreement too to protect their investment. An offer she couldn't turn down for financial reasons.

When I thought about the scale of the money offered I wondered how many woman could turn down 4 times their annual salary to do this. I myself might even give it a second thought.

We were sad to see her go but wished her all the best. We employed another nanny. 5 months later she had had 2 miscarriages and the couple ditched her. She was out of work for 8 weeks before she contacted me for help. I got her a job working with a colleague and his family.

She had gone through a terrible ordeal. Had her hopes dashed and ended up worse off financially due to her unemployment. I was so upset for her but really angry at the Australian couple.

Original poster
Soggiemoggie · 18/12/2018 17:14

I agree with you about adoption, but I don't think there are exactly loads of little babies available for adoption - and it seems to be a very difficult process to go through to 'succeed'.

Sorry but this just highlights the entitled attitude which makes me so upset. So someone (who for whatever reason) cannot conceive a baby but feels they have the "right" to one. And it has to be a "little" baby or whatever preference is expressed. Babies and children are not commodities to be bought and sold on an open market. Women wombs should not be for rent. And as for adoption being a difficult process to "succeed" in - would you rather it be an easy process so that these babies and children can be handed out quickly and conveniently?Confused

OP posts:
Original poster
Soggiemoggie · 18/12/2018 17:24

Try telling that to a fourth trimester newborn. I get that sometimes there is no choice to place a child for adoption but it doesn't seem right to deliberately engineer that situation

I find it hard to get past the removal of a newborn from its mother. I think it's unethical unless for the greater good of the child.

100% agree with these statements. It is the deliberate and intentional nature of bringing a child into the world for them to be separated from their mother for the sake of a personal wish (a wish not a right). And I have never heard of the term "gestational carrier" before starting this thread...what a misogynistic and dehumanising term!?!

OP posts:
Pennydrew142 · 18/12/2018 17:27

mmgirish
Oh that is a sad tale

SleepingStandingUp · 18/12/2018 17:28

Robbie Williams and his wife happily admitting that the reason they used a surrogate was because they were too busy with work commitments to go through pregnancy I found particularly shocking
Do you have a source for that?
There was a statement about what a long and hard route it had been from them.
There was a comment about the family being very busy from a friend.
This was put together to assume she was too busy to get pregnant. Given that she could work and travel til very late and be back at work with comprehensive childcare, I'm not convinced this is the reason.

I'd be interested to hear from the children of surrogacy as to how they feel, rather than lots of projection on how they must feel.

HeffalumpsDaughter · 18/12/2018 18:34

sleeping I’ve just had a look and I can’t find a source for it so apologies, I did just read the headlines and assume it was a quote.

But they had stated they struggled to see each other frequently enough to ttc ‘properly’. They had this baby presented to them at a time just after they started as judges on the X Factor (which Robbie has missed several episodes of as he’s had work commitments that clashed). To me this doesn’t scream that they’re prioritising a much longed for child who has just been put through an incredibly traumatic experience. They can’t possibly need the money that both of them need to work full time when they knew exactly when a baby would be given to them.

SleepingStandingUp · 18/12/2018 19:22

Oh yeah, I agree the timing kmis incredibly odd. Given that it's a VERVERY controlled procedure, I'm confused they didn't wait so at least one of them was off work.