The feminism argument against surrogacy?

[XXVaginaAndAUterus]

There's a program on radio 4 about surrogacy at the moment (trigger warning it talks about termination, miscarriage and ethics of testing procedures).

It reminded me that I've seen people on this board say quite strongly that surrogacy is wrong from a feminism point of view. Could you break it down for me and help me to understand?

I can see the argument that women's bodies aren't for rent on the surface of it. What troubles me is that isn't it just a different form of the same thing as many jobs? Lots of work involves effectively exchanging use of your body for money - builders for example, or waiting on staff. Lots of work involves the "rent" of a body in conjunction with a mind. So what makes a womb different? The danger? In which case are you against working on oil rigs or in war zones, and the military?

I'm genuinely seeking to understand this a bit better, I'm not looking for an argument.

I’m not a feminist but I can sincerely see ethical problems with it. Although I have less concerns if it’s done altruistically. The issue comes from where money changes hands, in that respect it differs little from organ donation.

Pregnancy can be risky, result in permanent injury and a lifetime of health complications or even death. The idea that those risks are more likely to be shouldered by the poorest in society with the least compressive health coverage if at all is pretty abhorrent to my mind.

I’m also reminded of that Australian couple who got a south East Asian surrogate who ended up with twins, only one was diagnosed with Down’s syndrome and she was instructed to terminate that one and they would proceed with taking the other. The very idea that because they were the ones that were paying thought they could dictate what this women could do with her own body exposes a pretty major ethical problem.

The mother and child may not be biologically related but the child doesn't know that and the mothers body has made the child not the person who gave the egg.

The surrogate isn’t biologically related to the child though, so is it the same as removing mother and child?

The woman is gestating the child in her body which would be subject to the exact same hormonal changes. The baby knows nothing about biology and so it's irrelevant that there is no genetic link.

As a surrogate for a gay male couple I can honestly say that they had my needs first at all times, I called all the shots and we have a great friendship.
The child I gave birth to is content with their parents, I am absolutely not their mother nor would I want to be.
I am gay myself so having my own children wasn’t straight-forward either.
I have a good job and I am well paid, I did have my expenses paid which was good as I didn’t want to have to pay for maternity clothes myself.
I am in no way a prostitute or an idiot, I am of sound mind and it was something I wanted to do.

@Seaseasea, as you see from my post, our bodies do interact genetically with our children when they are in our womb - it is called epigenetic. Many lifelong diseases are caused by genetic interactions between the woman and her growing baby. So yes, there is a genetic link, of course it does not suit the narrative.

Look up causes of ADHD, causes of Foetal alcohol syndrome, there are many others.

@PeachMelba78, well I hope the child feels the same as you when he or she reaches the age when they realise where they came from. I can tell you from the trauma of Ireland's adoption stories, this is not as easy as "oh but the parents I gave my child to were lovely".

The surrogate isn’t biologically related to the child though, so is it the same as removing mother and child?

If by 'biologically related' you mean genetically related, then yes, that is usually the case. However, it takes some bizarre train of thought to say that the woman who gestated that child for 9 months inside her body, nurtered it from her own body and then pushed it out, is somehow not that child's mother.

Plus,, often the 'intended mother' won't be genetically related to the child either. So according to your logic, she is also not the mother simply because she purchased the child?

I think people should stop trying to police woman’s body’s so much and let woman Male their own decisions.

This is the same argument which is trotted out to justify prostiution, stripping and other uses of female bodies which cater to men. And women's - and men's - bodies are 'policed' in lots of way. We're not allowed to sell our internal organs, we're not allowed to use certain drugs, we're not allowed to walk around naked. Do you believe all of these rules should be done away with too?

@annasgirl I hope so too but I am sure they will tell me themselves as I am in daily contact with the family.
Also they have had extensive background checks, counselling and evaluations so I am pretty sure they are going to take care of their baby just like I take care of my children

I think people should stop trying to police woman’s body’s so much and let woman Male their own decisions.

Interesting typo there

This argument is frequently rolled out when women are making decisions in the absence of real choice or opportunity (prostitution and the porn industry being two other areas that spring to mind). Not every decision made is an acceptable one and society legislates and controls what we can do in a wide variety of areas.

Yes their may be no ‘real choice’ for some,I agree some woman will turn to the sex/surrogacy/porn industry out of desperation and it’s terribly sad, but how are you helping her by saying she shouldn’t be allowed too?
Or do you not care how she feels, what she wants, what she needs as long as you feel morally better about not letting her use her body?

Obviously no one should ever be in the situation like that, easy to say from a privileged bubble though.

And what about the woman doing it solely because they’re done having kids or want to help someone else? Making someone parents through her own freewill.. using her body how she wishes to do so? Why do you get to decide she shouldnt?

Thanks Seaseasea. I know that some women will do it for monetary gain but the attitude that someone else decides what I do with my body seems crazy to me. I don’t like the American model whereby the parents get to choose the labour plans, the diet of the woman etc, I was very much in charge of my surrogacy and I wouldn’t have entertained someone else making decisions for me. If I am good enough to carry your baby I am good enough to make the best decisions for me and the baby.

the attitude that someone else decides what I do with my body seems crazy to me.

Do you also think it's crazy that someone else decides that you can't sell your kidneys or use certain drugs?

Yes their may be no ‘real choice’ for some,I agree some woman will turn to the sex/surrogacy/porn industry out of desperation and it’s terribly sad, but how are you helping her by saying she shouldn’t be allowed too?

It's not sad that some women have no choice but to sell their bodies and their children, it's a disgrace. It's not what civilised societies allow.

What happens if the women gets too old to be a surrogate, or her body too weak to sell?

Iced the difference is that when I got pregnant for me no-one said I couldn’t. I haven’t sold a baby or my body, I helped a loving couple become parents.

The point I'm making is that you object to someone else 'telling you what to do with your body', but the fact is that there are lots of things which none of us are legally allowed to do with our bodies.

Do you accept the principle that 'someone else' - ie the state' - has the right to tell us not to sell our bodies, or not? Couldn't someone also say they should be allowed to sell a kidney they could easily do without because nobody has the right to tell them what to do with their bodies? And with the sale of organs, the only person potentially harmed is the adult who consented to the sale. With surrogacy, an innocent baby is part of the 'deal'.

Iced I am not interested in an argument. My thoughts are solely around pregnancy and surrogacy. All children are innocent and people make decisions about them all the time, you can have a different opinion from me but I don’t need to defend myself or the decisions I make.

@Seaseasea
I think that as long as we take the "ah well, sure they have no other choice so we should let people buy and sell their bodies" then there is no motivation to really try to change their situations. It is a cop-out.
Women's lives will never be improved by allowing these kinds of practices to develop and/or continue.
As another poster said, it is a disgrace that some women have no choices outside of selling their bodies and children (and equally disgraceful are those who are complicit in supporting and developing those industries).

Iced I am not interested in an argument.

So you come onto a discussion thread and only engage with those people who agree with you? OK then.

No to discuss not to pick holes in other people’s posts. But whatever.

The vast majority of people who sleep on the streets are men, do you think that’s a coincidence? It is not what a civilised society allows, no. But it is happening in every society around you so open your eyes!

There’s many reasons for being destitute, bad luck, drugs, alcohol, family breakdowns, leaving care, leaving the forces etc... if a woman chooses to make money from non-conventional routes, then that is worrying and devastating but it is her choice.
We cannot help her by taking away her choice, we can help her by trying to solve the issues at the route. But ‘feminists’ seem more concerned with removing her choice to use her body how she wishes in order to improve her situation, Than they do helping her in her entirety.

As for voluntary surrogacy (As is legal in the UK - with no payment) that is none of your business, whatsoever, at any point. We cannot fight in the face of anti-abortionists that it’s none of your business what we do with our bodies and then turn around and tell a woman she shouldn’t be allowed a choice when it suits our moral compass.

No to discuss not to pick holes in other people’s posts.

Picking up on what you perceive to be logical flaws in someone's posts is very much a part of discussion.

But it's clear that you came here to have your choices validated, not to be take part in a discussion.

The vast majority of people who sleep on the streets are men, do you think that’s a coincidence?

MRA alert!

Stand by for a mention of male suicide rates.

Iced have you hit your head or did you never learn to read in context?

The vast majority of people who sleep on the streets are men, do you think that’s a coincidence?

What do homeless men have to do with surrogacy?

The vast majority of people who sleep on the streets are men, do you think that’s a coincidence? It is not what a civilised society allows, no. But it is happening in every society around you so open your eyes!

I'm not really following your logic here. Do you mean that surrogacy and prostitution stops women sleeping in the streets?