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:
LassOfFyvie · 30/07/2019 21:38

Or as you say women with no fertility issues.

JeanPagett · 30/07/2019 21:59

Kim Kardashian had pre-ecclapsia and placenta accreta.

Choosing to be more upset at women who have given birth and then choose surrogacy, and distrustful of their reasons for doing so, comes across as profoundly sexist.

IcedPurple · 30/07/2019 22:23

Choosing to be more upset at women who have given birth and then choose surrogacy, and distrustful of their reasons for doing so, comes across as profoundly sexist.

I'm distrustful of anyone's - male, female, gay, straight - reasons to choose surrogacy. Nobody has the right to purchase another human being.

Agrona · 30/07/2019 22:32

Agreed, IcedPurple. Yet some people believe that money solves all ills, heals all wounds and permits them to slake any desire.

JeanPagett · 30/07/2019 22:40

And that's fair enough Iced. I was talking about the posters who expressed views like "I agree however that women who have given birth and subsequently use a surrogate are in a class of their own."

littlebillie · 30/07/2019 22:47

This was really sad

www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-36012320

FannyCann · 30/07/2019 22:53

the tensions that arise when a woman's body is rented for the benefit of others and where the unit of exchange is measured in the life of a new human being," Judge Thackray said.

Says it all really.

IcedPurple · 30/07/2019 22:55

I was talking about the posters who expressed views like "I agree however that women who have given birth and subsequently use a surrogate are in a class of their own."

I think surrogacy is always wrong.

However, there's something particularly distasteful about a rich womanwho alaready has 2 healthy children renting a poor woman's body so that she can take the risks she is not prepared to take for herself.

LassOfFyvie · 30/07/2019 23:49

Choosing to be more upset at women who have given birth and then choose surrogacy, and distrustful of their reasons for doing so, comes across as profoundly sexist

A woman who has actually gone through a successful pregnancy, who has given birth, who has held her child and doesn't even have the excuse of infertility is in a special class of her own. She knows what it feels like to feel a baby move inside her ; she knows the excitement and anticipation of looking forward to meeting her child for the first time; she knows the silly conversations you have with your unborn child; she knows the nonsense nicknames you make up for your child; she knows about wondering if your child can hear and enjoy the music you like; she has experienced the unforgettable moment of holding her child for the first time. Knowing all that how can she expect another woman to do go through all of that and then hand over her child?

I could not care less whether you think it is sexist. There are degrees of vileness.

The gay couple are selfish and entitled, lacking in empathy but it's not beyond credibility that they really don't get what the big deal is. It's sexist to make excuses for vile behaviour just because a woman did it.

LassOfFyvie · 30/07/2019 23:57

Kim Kardashian had pre-ecclapsia and placenta accreta

My sister-in- law had pre-eclampsia. She had a terrible pregnancy and a horrendous labour. You know what my she and my brother did? Decided that one child was just fine and perfect. They didn't go around looking for another woman to take the burden from them.

JeanPagett · 31/07/2019 00:03

I could not care less whether you think it is sexist.

Ok. I do wonder why you're posting on FWR if that's how you feel about sexism mind.

2Rebecca · 31/07/2019 00:03

I agree. Choosing to have another woman give birth because childbirth is risky is very selfish. The surrogate may develop pre-eclampsia or placenta accreta. The surrogate may end up with a ruptured uterus and hysterectomy.

LassOfFyvie · 31/07/2019 00:13

Ok. I do wonder why you're posting on FWR if that's how you feel about sexism mind

Calling out "ooh that is so sexist" doesn't make it true. It's sexist to make excuses for women's behaviour just because they are women.

sakura184 · 31/07/2019 00:33

Commercial surrogacy is horrible and distressing yes

sakura184 · 31/07/2019 00:35

Being against gay males exploiting women isn't homophobia.

It really isn't: I'm so against gay men using surrogates for lots of reasons. I am even against them adopting as i feel there should at least be a mother figure for the child.

JeanPagett · 31/07/2019 00:46

Calling out "ooh that is so sexist" doesn't make it true. It's sexist to make excuses for women's behaviour just because they are women.

Holding mothers to a higher standard just because they have experienced pregnancy is sexist though.

You're generalising about how women feel based on, I presume, your own experience of pregnancy. Surely a mother is uniquely well informed to appreciate exactly what it is she is asking of a surrogate and decide that it's something she can reasonably ask of another woman.

You claim gay men don't "get what the big deal is", many women who have experienced pregnancy and birth feel just the same.

LassOfFyvie · 31/07/2019 01:26

More excuses. Do you post here often?

There have been many threads about surrogacy. Many posters have pointed out how evil it is to deliberately plan to take a baby away from its mother and have pointed out how evil and selfish it is to plan to deliberately break the bond between mother and child.

You are making excuses for women who already have children and who want more children- selfish women but presumably still women who well understand the bond between mother and child.

Holding mothers to a higher standard just because they have experienced pregnancyis sexist though

Many people for various reasons and circumstances are held to higher standards than others. You (general you and any other surrogate apologists) can't have it both ways. If a woman is so desperate to be a mother she will go to these extraordinary and unethical lengths to have another baby, having a child must be a pretty, amazing thing. Unless of course when it's it's just a womb for hire doing it- they don't really matter.

Your contribution to the debate has been less than scintillating. Do you actually have any opinions on the ethics and morality of surrogacy or are you going to continue to make non- points about a peripheral issue?

LassOfFyvie · 31/07/2019 01:29

You claim gay men don't "get what the big deal is",

Stop twisting what I said. I said it is not beyond the bounds of credibility that they would understand what pregnancy and birth can mean to a woman.

JeanPagett · 31/07/2019 02:33

By all means think surrogacy is evil if you want. But claiming it's somehow extra specially evil if the beneficiary is already a mother is playing in to ridiculous gendered stereotypes.

Yes, being a parent is an amazing thing. The process of pregnancy, for many women, isn't - it's just a biological process. Surely women who have experienced pregnancy are in fact best placed to make that assessment. Condemning mothers for not feeling exactly the same as you do about the "magic of pregnancy" whilst letting gay men off the hook is ridiculous.

2BthatUnnoticed · 31/07/2019 06:50

littlebillie yes that was sad - and in addition, the father had a conviction for a child sex offence. So I don’t think they would have been eligible to adopt, yet were able to, in effect, purchase a baby.

LassOfFyvie · 31/07/2019 07:38

By all means think surrogacy is evil if you want. But claiming it's somehow extra specially evil if the beneficiary is already a mother is playing in to ridiculous gendered stereotypes

Well I'm not the only poster who said that. It has nothing to do with "playing into ridiculous gendered stereotypes".

Condemning mothers for not feeling exactly the same as you do about the "magic of pregnancy" whilst letting gay men off the hook is ridiculous

How can you be so blind to the utter selfishness of a woman who already has a child but who is happy to treat another woman as a womb for hire?

It has nothing to do with the magic of pregnancy. It is about someone who already has a child and presumably would never contemplate handing that child over, but is happy to exploit another woman to take her child. You were making excuses for Kim Kardashian that she had had a difficult pregnancy.

And no one is letting gay men off the hook.

LassOfFyvie · 31/07/2019 07:40

I see you still haven't actually said anything about the morality or ethics of surrogacy and are still fixating on "ooh that's sexist"

JeanPagett · 31/07/2019 11:48

Well I'm not the only poster who said that.

I know you're not. I'm not sure why you think that's an excuse.

It is about someone who already has a child and presumably would never contemplate handing that child over, but is happy to exploit another woman to take her child.

Many women are perfectly able to rationalise the difference between their child and a child belonging to another couple that they have given birth to. If you can't then fine being a surrogate isn't for you, but don't dismiss the feelings and lived experience of other mothers.

WhatTheWatersShowedMe · 31/07/2019 12:45

sakura184 :
"I'm so against gay men using surrogates for lots of reasons. I am even against them adopting as i feel there should at least be a mother figure for the child."

Should lesbians (or single women) be allowed to adopt children because there should be a father figure in the child's life?

WhereAreWeNow · 31/07/2019 12:50

I don't have much to add OP other than to say I feel the same way. I've been reading through the Law Commission consultation and I have to admit I've shed a couple of tears. I didn't know I felt so strongly about this issue until I started looking into it. It just seems so brutal and transactional. It comes across as a bunch of lawyers drawing up watertight contracts and quibbling over compensation if the contract falls through. The human rights of the mother and the baby don't seem to be very prominent in the review. It's all about the rights of the buyer.