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.

The intentional creation of a child to be separated from its mother.

This misses the point. The surrogate (in the case of gestational surrogacy) is carrying a child for its mother - the IM. There is no separation of the child from ‘its mother’ as the surrogate is not in any way the child’s mum.

There is no separation of the child from ‘its mother’ as the surrogate is not in any way the child’s mum.

This woman carries the child for 9 months, grows it out of her own flesh and blood, and then pushes it out (or has it surgically cut out) of her body, undergoing great physical stress in the process.

But she is not in any way the child's mum.

Ladies and gentlemen, Welcome to Gilead. Blessed be the fruit.

By context to my earlier opinion, I am currently 6 months pregnant as a gestational surrogate.

I am not this baby’s mother. In any way.

Going back to the R4 programme, I found it really uncomfortable. There was a sort of need-to-be-needed on behalf of the woman... maybe it's just the way her words were voiced.... and how the male couple decided whether the baby she was birthing had a name, funeral arrangements etc.

I am not this baby’s mother. In any way.

Keep telling yourself that it it makes you feel better.

It will never make it true however.

Oh are we at the stage now of comparing woman making a decision to carry someone else’s baby to woman being kidnapped, their children taken off them, locked in a room and held down and raped in order to birth their rapists baby?

Ok that’s when the crazy hits too much to contemplate civilised discussion.

as the surrogate is not in any way the child’s mum

You can say it as many times as you like, doesn’t make it true. We aren’t in Gilead just yet.

Pretending that the woman who has gestated and birthed a baby is in 'no way it's mother' is to attempt to reduce the role of the woman in reproduction to that of the man, gamete supply. It's bullshit. The denial of biological reality in order to protect wants and feelings is quite a familiar concept to many on these boards I'm sure.

Plus, a 'surrogate' is in the exact same situation, biologically speaking, as a woman who is carrying a child conceived via IVF using donor eggs, a not uncommon scenario.

Would "Anon" tell that woman she is "not in any way the child's mum"? Because from the biological perspective, their situations are identical.

My amazing surrogate, who gave birth onto me, allowed me skin to skin with the baby

Look, I don’t doubt that your arrangement felt amazing.

But this sentence disturbs needs deeply. It reads like something from The Handmaid’s Tale.

For those who are pro-surrogacy, or who have been a surrogate I have copied and pasted a combination of my comments from the other thread, and I would be grateful if you could try and answer some of these questions and justify your position. It’s lovely that an individual’s experience passed without issues, but what if it doesn’t?

So whose rights are most important? Consider these scenarios and explain how time and consideration will sort it out:

At 12 week prenatal testing it’s discovered the fetus has a severe abnormality. The surrogate wants to abort, should she be allowed to? What if the adoptive parents are religious and don’t want her to? What if the adoptive parents want to abort but the surrogate is religious and doesn’t want to? What if the pregnancy will threaten her life but the adoptive parents don’t want to abort? What if the adoptive parents decide that if she continues with a pregnancy resulting in a child with a severe abnormality they won’t have anything to do with it?

What if the pregnant woman has a major complication like a pulmonary embolism? What if she can’t return to full functioning afterwards? What if she can never work again as a result? What if she can’t look after her own family?

What if there is a conflict between parties about timing and mode of delivery? Who gets to decide? What if there’s a severe hypoxic ischaemic injury to the baby as a result of this decision? Is it anyone’s fault? Should a woman be forced to undertake a Caesarean section?

What if after a severe hypoxic ischaemic injury the adoptive parents decide they don’t want to look after a child with severe spastic quadraplegic cerebral palsy? Who does the baby belong to?

What if the pregnant woman developed gestational diabetes and didn’t look after herself? Ditto high blood pressure?

What if there’s an intrauterine fetal death? What if it’s discovered the pregnant woman smoked and drank? What if she ate something considered high risk? What if she undertook an activity deemed high risk? Should blame be apportioned? Could someone sue someone in this scenario?

What if, in the postnatal period, the birth mother develops severe postnatal depression or psychosis? Who looks after her? For how long? What if it stays with her for years?

What if the pregnant woman is group B strep positive? What if she doesn’t want antibiotics? What if she does but the adoptive parents don’t because they want everything natural? What if she’s given antibiotics and has an allergic reaction? What if she has a recurrence of previously unknown genital herpes? What if the baby has herpes encephalitis postnatally as a result? Is that her fault?

What if she develops antibodies to the fetus’s red blood cells or platelets? What if that results in invasive in utero procedures? What if she needs immunoglobulin as a result and has a reaction?

What if she has a severe postpartum haemorrhage? What if she needs a blood transfusion or two?

Basically, if harm results to the pregnant woman as a result of the pregnancy whose responsibility is that? Can the finances ever truly reconcile all eventualities? Can/should a pregnant woman be forced to undertake medical treatment if it’s in the best interests of a third party? What if what is in her best interests is not what is in the best interests of that third party?

Who pays for hospital parking? Who pays for petrol to get to appointments? Who attends appointments? What if there is another medical issue arises requiring confidentiality? Should a doctor disclose this information in front of adoptive parents present in an appointment? If adoptive parents are at appointments what pressure is there? Would the pregnant woman be able to openly disclose concerns? What if a doctor or midwife suspected there was coercion? Who would they report that to? What’s the burden of proof for coercion? How would the legal system address this quickly with an advancing pregnancy?

Now look at this link about the types of contracts that are used in California:

www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2017/11/20390/

This part really sent chills down my spine:

If the surrogate is in her second or third trimester of pregnancy and in the event that medical life support equipment is required to preserve and maintain the life of the Surrogate and if requested by the Intended Parents, the Surrogate and her husband agree that the Surrogate’s life will be sustained with life support equipment for a period to achieve viability of the fetus taking into account the best interests and well-being of the fetus . . . The Intended Parents will make the decision with regard to how long the life support should be continued prior to the birth of the Child taking into account the obstetrician or perinatologist’s recommendation and the desires of the family of the Surrogate. The Surrogate’s husband, or her next of kin, is solely responsible for determining the time at which life support treatment will be discontinued following the birth of the Child.

Let’s be clear what this bit is saying: the intended parents get to keep the body of a woman warm and functional until a baby can be cut out of her safely, after which it’s not their problem any more.

So if anyone pro-surrogacy can address these issues and explain why it’s a good option, I’d be grateful.

Brilliant post NotBad.

A nod to FannyCann for the link about contracts. Very chilling and informative.

"So if anyone pro-surrogacy can address these issues and explain why it’s a good option, I’d be grateful"
Well clearly its not a good idea for you, but nobody is asking you or forcing you to be a surrogate. But for other people it works for them, therefore it is a good option. We're not all the same, we all have different views.
I'm pro surrogacy provided the right safeguards can be put in place to protect all parties (including the child).

Catapultaway So how do you come up with a contract that addresses all those concerns then? Just explain how you would protect all parties in the instance of termination as a starter.

Lots of good points made on this thread - I really sympathise with those who have fertility problems, and I feel torn on the subject of altruistic surrogacy but they'd is no way it can be described as "just another job". If that is the only way you can justify it as being morally ok, then you have no justification. It is a desperate, scraping of the barrel type of argument you more commonly hear in relation to paying for the privilege of ejaculating into an impoverished human being for cash.

Also, working on an oil rig really isn't dangerous.
Not nowadays. In the UK it is statistically an incredibly safe job (largely due to extensive measures put in place to reduce risk and protect workers.)

I have worked on oil rigs, and I have also been pregnant and given birth.

The worst thing injury I sustained on an oil rig was a bruised thumb. It was better within a week, and there was a minor investigation.

Pregnancy has permanently changed my body, (despite a relatively easy, complication free one) and over the 18 hours I spent giving birth I came closer to death/serious injury than I did in all my years offshore. (Again, despite a relatively uncomplicated birth). It took months to recover and heal after the birth. I am lucky in that pregnancy and birth only left me with "minor" long term issues.

Just because maternal mortality is now (thankfully) rare in countries like the UK, it does not mean pregnancy and childbirth is "safe". When considering the frequency of all the chronic and acute medical issues that occur, it is still very risky. Include minor long term issues and it is difficult to find a woman on whose health pregnancy and birth had no impact.

Just because most women don't die does not make it safe or consequence free.

NotBadConsidering... You address the issues at the outset, everyone has a clear understanding of what they are entering into, everyone has it fully explained. I've seen some of the American contracts, yes they are ludicrous, but that doesn't mean there can't be a solution found. And in the vast majority of cases it is hopefully irrelevant

To add to your list NotBad

What if cancer is detected in the surrogate whilst she is pregnant? Can she terminate or opt for early delivery to get life-saving treatment? Or would she need to continue the pregnancy longer than she should at the behest of the adoptive parents, even if it risks her chance of successful treatment?

Catapultaway you accept the contracts are ludicrous, but you still think a solution can be found? These are the best that legal people can come up with. What makes you think they can be improved? The only way answers and solutions can be found is if one party forfeits their rights. Who should that be in your opinion? The surrogate or the intended parents?

Don’t you think a legal transaction that involves the life of a woman and baby should be based on more than just “hoping” everything goes well? Because it hasn’t in cases in the past and it’s only a matter of time or numbers before those scenarios I’ve posted happen. They are common pregnancy issues.

NotBadConsidering
I'm glad you found it informative.
I posted it on a different thread so I'll post it again here.

www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2017/11/20390/

I absolutely oppose surrogacy in all circumstances but haven't really had the energy to joint the debate here.

I know the Drewitt-Barlow girl is as vacuous as her fathers and claims to want to have children by surrogate so she doesn't have to go through pregnancy. But I feel many children as they grow up and discover they were bought from impoverished women may feel differently. Think of the Nepal earthquake, when Israel mounted an emergency flight to evacuate the contract babies commissioned by mostly gay men, the mothers left to take their chances in the aftermath of the earthquake. How could you respect the father that had done that?

Look at the way this surrogate was treated and think how the child will feel as she grows up and learns the truth about her mother being an object of mockery to her fathers.

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

It's buying babies. Which is meant to be illegal. And people who would never be acceptable as adoptive parents (at least in countries where social workers carefully screen prospective adopters) are able to buy eggs/speed and commission a baby to order. It disgusts me.

Buy eggs/sperm that should read.

This website has stories of people born by donor eggs/sperm and surrogacy. Some are quite happy with their lot. Many aren't.

anonymousus.org/stories/

One of the stories.

DEAR CURRENT AND PROSPECTIVE PARENTS, PLEASE READ THIS

Submitted on: March 27, 2019

Dear Prospective Parents (and current parents, this is good for you to read too),
I understand you want to bring a beautiful, loving child into this world. I understand it’s programmed deep into our psychology and biology. I understand you genuinely believe you will be the best parent in the world and you can do no harm, and you will be so, so, SO loving and as long as you have read a few articles from people who are donor conceived, you’re in the clear.
And you might be. Your baby who becomes a kid who becomes an adult could be totally well-adjusted. That is legitimately a possibility. Honesty, transparency, communication, and therapy are powerful tools for good that could keep your child healthy and grounded.
There’s also the possibility that you will cause deep existential and biological trauma that will be irreversible. I can only speak to my personal experience. I have an abusive single mother who bought me to fill her loneliness, with her (conditional) love being contingent on meeting her needs. I have a donor-father who openly admits he helped bring me into this world so he could profit off of my existence and play out his Genghis Khan-like fantasy.
These aren’t matters of interpretation. These are unfortunately just the facts about my conception. And I am stuck with them. For the rest of my life, I am stuck with them. My healing will have to be a full acceptance of these facts, rather than having the ability to redo my thinking. I can be grateful to be alive all I want. It does not take away that people bought and sold me for their self-serving desires.
You could also be complicit in eugenics, dysgenics, genetic homogenization, and incest. If you use the standard fertility clinic, which discriminates against people based on height, weight, sexual orientation, race, socioeconomic status, and biological diversity, you are complicit in selective breeding. You are complicit in saying that certain lives are more worthy of existing than others. You are giving up your rights to ever say you support people with any differences. You will be treating your child like a pedigree dog.
Because of the sheer quantity of children conceived through a single donor, we have now unleashed a genetic Pandora’s Box that is unfortunately too late to reverse. I could have sex with one of my potentially 50 unknown half-siblings and have kids as a result of incest. I will probably have to genetically screen my future partners while everyone else gets to be stress-free in finding love. Or I could have kids with someone I’m not related to, but then our kids procreate with the kids of my unknown half-siblings. The problem gets exponentially worse with each generation. The overall issue will be mass homogenization. There will be so many humans with incredibly similar genes due to accidental, nonconsensual incest. If a disease or a mutation occurs, people will die. Potentially millions depending on how many generations go by before the catastrophe.
Your child could never be free from concerns of incest. Your child could never be free from being a product. Your child could never be free from the Nazi-like selection of genes that sperm banks use as their modus operandi. You will never be free from these actions, either.
If you want to be the best parent, set your kid up with what is best for THEM, not what is best for YOU. If you cannot create a child without forcing them into a world of incest and eugenics, then perhaps you are not a good parent. If you have to create a child by taking away their heritage, medical information, biological identity, and their biological parent, then perhaps you are not a good parent. Perhaps you are being very selfish. Perhaps you are just looking to justify how what you are doing is okay. But perhaps what you are doing is not okay. Perhaps it is evil, selfish, incestuous, Nazi-like, and cruel. Regardless of your intent, your actions will have consequences on the entirety of your child’s life and the future of human life on this Earth.
You will not have to live the life of your child. You can absolve yourself of the guilt and move on, but your child will not have that same luxury. Please take this seriously. Consider adoption. Consider using someone in your life who will be available to the child, even if they act more like an aunt, uncle, or godparent. Consider any option other than degrading your child’s life. It is not about you. It is about them. You have no idea how much you could hurt your child. This is not a game. Stop cherry-picking happy stories. This is our real lives. Take it seriously.

It's buying babies

It is. One doesn't even have to frame it as a feminist argument.

The bar these days for removing a child from its birth parents and having them adopted is very high. (Or low depending on how you look at things.) Loads of research has been done and it has been found that it is better for children to stay with parents who are barely adequate than it is for them to be adopted by Mr and Mrs Perfect Couple with their full set of ladybird books, a beautiful nursery and enough love and cuddles to sink a ship.

Effectively it is that damaging to remove a baby from their birth mother that it is better for them to spend their childhood being a bit dirty, occasionally hungry and witnessing serious levels of disfunction.

In surrogacy you are choosing to create a child to love and then the very very very first thing you do to them is hugely damage them.

I want to believe in surrogacy. I want to be part of the whole “Love conquers all” world. But I can’t. I know how my children knew my voice and were comforted by it as soon as they were born. Not because we share DNA. But because they had spent 9 months listening to me wittering on and hearing my heart beat. They knew me.