So upset by commercial surrogacy

[Soggiemoggie]

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!

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!

He has exactly the same "right" as anyone else has.

No man has the right to father a child

This. This is the core of feminism. This is what everyone needs to understand.

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

Ok, didn't know that. Is it cynical that I no wonder if there's a need to prove having a regular income, of if people who do NOT get food tokens or Medicaid (too proud, illegal immigrant, not able to apply due to mental health problems, financially dependent on someone else) can still do it?

I mean, it doesn't matter, as the tale of the nanny proves, women with a regular (but small) income can still be tempted.
But I tend to assume the worst. Humans are shit.

It not being possible to enforce the mother handing over the child in the UK makes things a bit better ... but is not much different from pressuring teen mothers into giving up their children ... actually worse as the pregnancy is created on purpose.

Funnily enough my sis & I were discussing this today,! Both of us feel very uncomfortable with the buying & selling of babies and the use of women as if they are commodities. You are right to be upset about it. I am angry with the likes of Kim & Kanye, SJP, Elton Joh etc who think money can buy them anything. Big name stars have legitimised this despicable practice wi which is bad for vulnerable women and horrific for the babies taken from their birth mum and source of life for 9 months

I don't like commercial surrogacy at all, I wish it was illegal.
I don't have an objection to altruistic surrogacy - I loved being pregnant, and despite the risks, I would have carried a child for my sister had she been unable to. Just like I would donate her a kidney if she needed it.
No problem with sperm or egg donation as long as it's managed carefully.

agree with PP about buying, selling or renting bodies or body parts.

I find it abhorrent that a financial incentive is presented to a poorer woman to get pregnant and give the child away. I accept (but can’t personally understand, for myself) that some women do it altruistically, but commercial surrogacy is just exploitative in my view.

I saw a documentary on Irish tv a few years ago, following a couple in their 50s traveling to India to ‘have their baby’ via commercial surrogacy. It was a second marriage and they each already had grown up children, IIRC. I had to turn it off.

I agree OP. I’m very uncomfortable with the whole thing.

I think I’ve said this before but I’m also alerted to how common twins are with surrogacy: SJP, CR, Ricky M etc.

As if pregnancy and birth isn’t risky enough for the mother, to think there was an element of BOGOF is revolting.

Meant to say, any multiple birth is automatically a high risk pregnancy.

I don't have an objection to altruistic surrogacy - I loved being pregnant, and despite the risks, I would have carried a child for my sister had she been unable to.

I get that - the child would still be in your life.

Though I do think there is potential for coercion in that, too.

I remember reading an article once where a trans child was cited saying that they didn't mind becoming infertile, because their sister would carry their baby for them.
Can't remember, I think the person was male and wanted to impregnate the sister with future hubby's sperm. Could also have a female trans wanting to use their own (frozen) eggs in the sister's womb.

The "trans ally" parents and the sibling together would probably succeed in bullying the sister into doing it.

Horrible.

So I do think that sort of thing should be looked at very closely, too.

And now Ricky Martin announces the birth of a daughter with absolutely no reference to a mother whatsoever. I find it chilling.

I'm in a similar position. And yes, I have a massive problem with selling babies and wombs for hire.

These are women who are human and have less rights because of their biological capacity which allows them to be exploited and children who have a biological history which is important to their psychology.

mmgirish how sad for your poor nanny, I'm glad you were able to help her find work.

I'm firmly of the opinion no one has a right to a child and I say this as someone who always desperately wanted children, had considerable problems ttc and almost died as a result of pregnancy complications.

I'm against all forms of surrogacy commercial and altruistic. The risk of coercion in a family is too high and I've read of many cases where it occurs. Commercial surrogacy is horribly exploitative of the mother and when it isn't legal to purchase another human being in any other circumstance why is it legal to buy newborns?

I'm also against sperm donation, I struggle to see how men can do this with no concern about any future children that might be conceived but I guess there has been no downside to the donation process for them, it hasn't involved any risk, commitment or great inconvenience to them.

I'm not sure how I feel about it tbh, but doesn't body autonomy dictate that a woman can do whatever she pleases with her own body?

I am absolutely opposed to commercial surrogacy and no one has a right to have a child of their own but I also don't like to hear the "lots of children needing adoption" line. Just because you cannot have children does not mean you should consider adopting. It certainly isn't as simple as potentially having to consider a child of a different race. The plenty of children who are in need of adopting include high numbers of children with severe disabilities, fetal alcohol syndrome, attachment disorder, many (most?) of whom have already been through their early years stage and may never catch up on key developmental milestones. I have huge admiration for people with hearts big enough to adopt but the challenges they face are usually much much greater than natural parents.

I'm don't agree with commercial surrogacy. It's buying the use of someone (poor and female, quelle surprise)'s body.

It's akin to asking a poor man to sell you his kidney, IMO.

I have a vague memory of a gay couple on a reality TV show in the USA who used a woman as a commercial surrogate. She had said she didn't want to be filmed in childbirth and this couple ignored that, filmed her without her knowledge, and then slagged off her fanjo on the show because (during the delivery) it was huge ( no shit, Sherlock) and she hadn't removed her pubic hair. The woman was very upset about how they'd betrayed her after all she'd done.

The baby was a girl too. It still upsets me that that little girl is being raised by two such awful men.

Sonic I posted the link upthread. It disgusts me and I feel so sorry for the little girl.

www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2018/06/her-name-is-monroe-christine

Last I looked they hadn't bothered to delete tweets about it either even though they attracted a fair amount of opprobrium.

www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2018/06/her-name-is-monroe-christine

I've just watched a couple of episodes of the reality show 'Flipping Out' including the one where Munroe is born. The 'Fathers' are both pricks and no way is that baby getting the best start in life.

I don't care if that makes me homophobic

I sympathise with how the op feels. It's not easy to understand why people go to such lengths, it's quite possible for a baby to have two mothers - one who provides the ova and another who carries the baby. Strange world we live in. No-one is entitled to have a child, surely?

In this instance (RM) and others, it’s the total erasure of the woman that I find horrifying. There wasn’t even a token thank you.

The article about Munroeis disturbing, I hope she wasn't bought to improve ratings. Poor girl having parents do disgusted by women's bodies and so disgusting in how they treated her mother

At its core, surrogacy is mysoginstic. How can it be otherwise? Before modern technology, surrogacy required some sort of ownership of the woman so the wife could legally claim the child as her own (at least in ancient biblical times). The woman was basically raped by the father and her child was taken from her (she likely breastfed it though)

The removal of the sex act to conceive the child only papers over the origins of surrogacy, but it still boils down to using and abusing a (vulnerable) woman's body for gain.

I understand there are situations of voluntary surrogacy where the woman wouldn't be abused, but that doesn't erase the overall problems inherent in the structures and attitudes surrounding surrogacy as a whole.

I'm against it, regardless of who is involved. There are too many risks for the woman and too little regard for the child.

No man has the right to father a child

No woman has the right to get pregnant either, I feel similarly about men who donate their sperm for financial incentive. However I realise sperm is something women now have a right to for some reason. Obviously the men being fathers thing is very different because that means the woman must give birth. But I think the intellectual justification for it stems from same place.

However as Raisan points out, how do people square support for abortion and the "my uterus my choice" or "bodily autonomy" or any of the other statements that justify abortion in terms of ownership and independent and free choice about what each womb owner does with it ? A woman could be coerced into abortion, but we don't ban it for that reason.

I think commercial surrogacy is abhorrent but if you really believe that a woman can do whatever she wants with her womb and it is no one else business then how do you justify opposition to it ?

Elon, the abortion my-body-my-choice is because nobody should be forced to continue a pregnancy that they don't want.

Surrogacy is someone using someone else's body.

The issues around surrogacy are more akin to whether Prostitution is a valid "my body, my choice" situation, not abortion. The feminist position is generally that it's wrong to pay for the use of someone's body, and that financial pressure shouldn't coerce a woman into giving someone the use of her body when she wouldn't otherwise.