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

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Building families through surrogacy: A new Law - Consultation

147 replies

FannyCann · 28/07/2019 11:59

Building families through surrogacy: A new Law - Consultation

Last Tuesday I attended one of several public consultation events around the country to hear discussion of the proposals and recommendations to the government regarding new laws to regulate surrogacy. Now I am opposed to surrogacy in all forms and wish Britain would follow other European countries such as Switzerland, France, Germany and Sweden in banning it. However our government and the department of heath take a different view:

“Our project does not seek to examine whether or not surrogacy should be allowed. Instead, we take as our starting point that surrogacy is an accepted form of building a family, as recognised by the Department of Health and Social Care in the guidance it publishes on surrogacy arrangements”

So in the spirit of examining how the laws should be reformed I thought it would be helpful to have a new thread devoted to this discussion - there have been quite a few threads where the rights and wrongs of surrogacy have been discussed and I have voiced my opposition. Now I think we should look at the fine detail of the proposals and support and advise anyone who wants to contribute to the discussion by responding to the consultation.

Links:

Summary of the consultation paper, a shorter overview of the proposals.

https://s3-eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/lawcom-prod-storage-11jsxou24uy7q/uploads/2019/06/Surrogacy-summary.pdff_

The full consultation paper, all 502 pages, not for the faint hearted! Disclaimer - I haven’t worked my way through it all yet either!

https://s3-eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/lawcom-prod-storage-11jsxou24uy7q/uploads/2019/06/Surrogacy-consultation-paper.pdff_

Link to respond to the consultation - at the event one of the organisers stressed that all answers are welcomed and don’t feel you have to answer all the questions. Just answer some if you want to.

https://consult.justice.gov.uk/law-commission/surrogacyy_

Or you can email comments to:

“However, we are happy to accept comments in other formats. If you would like to a response form in word format, do email us to request one. Please send your response:
By email to [email protected]k_
OR
By post to Surrogacy Team, Law Commission, 1st Floor, Tower, 52 Queen Anne’s Gate, London, SW1H 9AG.
If you send your comments by post, it would be helpful if, whenever possible, you could also send them by email.
If you have any questions, you can contact the team at: [email protected]

Back to Tuesday. I have name changed as anyone who was there will know who I am. I left work at lunchtime planning to catch a train that would get me to Cardiff with plenty of time to cross the square from the train station to attend the event starting at 4pm. But it was a very hot day. Successive announcements warned that the train would be delayed by 12, 18, 36, 48 minutes...I contemplated abandoning the trip and going swimming. We got on the train (dd had decided it would be interesting to come with me), and soon we were told the train would be terminating for maintenance and we had to change. So...three trains later I staggered into the meeting room, extremely hot and sweaty, having somehow acquired a generous smear of black grease from one
of the trains all down the front of my dress, and the only seats available were at the front🥵!

The presentation had just finished and questions were starting. Of course I was very disappointed to have missed the presentation however the slides on the screen were of the twenty four pages of the summary paper linked above which I had printed off and read so although I missed the wider explanation I have an idea what the previous hour had covered.

From the questions raised referenced by some of the screenshots:

There was discussion of the proposed new pathway, which will include legal advice for the surrogate and the intended parents, and “implications” counselling for the surrogate, her family and intended parents.

A hopeful intended parent disagreed with compulsory legal advice on the grounds that she was a solicitor and didn’t need it. A recent surrogate mother disagreed with compulsory counselling as she knew what she had done and didn’t need it.

Both of these points were politely dismissed by the person presenting the proposals. And I absolutely agree with him. If anything these views demonstrated to me how these provisions absolutely need to be compulsory and I was surprised that two apparently intelligent and thoughtful people would not see that these proposals are to provide protection for other people who may be less well informed.

There was discussion around the payments and costs. I queried compensation for death of the surrogate. It was suggested that intended parents would be expected to pay for life insurance for the surrogate.

I also raised the matter of egg donors, as they appeared not to have been mentioned. We were informed that payment for egg donors is capped at £750 in the UK.

Thinking about it since the event, shouldn’t egg donors have some sort or health/sickness/life insurance too?
Ovarian hyper stimulation syndrome is a well known complication and can be life threatening in 1-2 % of cases.

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/ovarian-hyperstimulation-syndrome-ohss/symptoms-causes/src-203546977_

Also I have been looking at some American donor egg bank sites online. Payments are significantly higher over there, especially for young women with sought after genetic traits (high IQ, athletic prowess, beauty etc). Payments may be as much as $10,000.
I have no idea if it is legal but if I was looking to make money from my eggs a holiday in the USA and a substantial payment looks a lot more attractive that £750!

Discussion moved onto the question of payments to the surrogate. The surrogates in the room were very clear, the commercial model of the USA, where surrogates may be paid around $40,000 is not welcome in the UK. The presenter was in agreement. One surrogate mentioned the type of punitive contracts used in the USA and absolutely rejected the possibility of signing such a contract.
So surrogacy should remain altruistic with just payments for expenses covered, this was generally agreed.

However I have been thinking about this more over the past few days and it seems to be a bit of a conundrum. Look at the proposed pathway and think about the number of services and professionals involved along the way, all of whom will have a commercial interest in surrogacy:

Lawyers
Counsellors
Private fertility clinics
Egg donors - at least for £750
Insurance companies
Surrogacy agencies
Possibly advertisers if this is made legal

All of these people have skin in the game and will be profiting from each surrogate pregnancy. The intended parents get their baby. And the surrogate? Some redundant maternity clothes, a few more stretch marks and a warm fuzzy feeling at having given the most generous gift of life.

That just doesn’t sit right with me. Maybe I am just too selfish, too close minded, too unimaginative to understand why someone would want to go through nine months of pregnancy and birth for someone else. But I hate to feel ripped off and taken advantage of. And I can’t wrap my mind around the principle of a whole industry (the presenter mentioned they expected a growth in numbers) predicated on a steady supply of generous individuals who are the only people in the chain who make no profit.

The only comparable situation I can think of is altruistic kidney donation, which is uncommon but some people do it. I’m not sure exactly how one would go about it but I would think in the uk approaching the national transplant organisation would put you in touch with your nearest transplant centre, they would do medical and psychological assessments and if all was well make arrangements. It would all be in house, within the nhs, absolutely no profit anywhere, of that I am sure.

Incidentally the questions raised about making counselling and legal advice compulsory seemed to be rooted in trying to keep costs to a minimum for the intended parents. Which seemed to miss the point of these recommendations somewhat.

I have no answer for this - commercial, with substantial payment to the surrogate v altruistic with payment of expenses only to the surrogate but lots of side players profiting along the way. It is definitely something I will mention in my reply to the consultation.

So to wrap up, there were one or two people present who I suspected could be mumsnetters - one woman mentioned the rights of the child, the “quiet voice” of the baby which was the silent voice in the room. Another woman drilled down some statistics that had been mentioned in the presentation that I missed so I couldn’t comment except to say she was tenacious and had a sound mathematical mind which put the presenter at a distinct disadvantage. Well done her.

I may or may not have caused outrage with one or two grenades I lobbed - least said the better 😉

Which reminds me, I am not happy with a proposed minimum age for surrogates of 18. Yes, as someone said, it is the age of adult majority, and the presenter said it was unlikely in reality that an 18 year old would be accepted, but still....

There are more public events to come, and the screenshot I have shown doesn’t include the Scottish ones - Edinburgh on 9 September, Aberdeen 10 September, another London event is planned, date to be confirmed. You can search for events on Eventbrite, look for “Building families through surrogacy” and they come up.

Also the closing date for the consultation says previously said 27 September but seems to have been extended to 11 October on some of the information, probably best to email directly if you have queries about this.

So I hope this thread can be a useful result rice for anyone be interested in commenting on the proposals and looking at how the new law may pan out. I know many of us get heated about the rights and wrongs of surrogacy but I think it would be helpful to keep those discussions on other threads and keep this one centred on the proposals for new laws in the UK.

Building families through surrogacy: A new Law - Consultation
Building families through surrogacy: A new Law - Consultation
Building families through surrogacy: A new Law - Consultation
OP posts:
Thread gallery
13
BernardBlacksWineIceLolly · 02/08/2019 08:15

@fannycann

I'd like to send some kind of response to the consultation, but my life is really full on atm, I don't really have the capacity to do the whole thing.

are there any particular questions you think it would be good to pick out to answer to make the points made so well on this thread about

  • the harm to the purchased baby
  • the risk of physical harm to the surrogate
  • the risk of exploitation of the surrogate

if not, I'll send an email to the address you kindly included in your OP. but I wonder if even a partially completed consulatation might 'count' more?

ChattyLion · 02/08/2019 09:52

This Cambridge University anthropologist’s observations on surrogacy finds harm to women: www.rbmsociety.com/article/S2405-6618(18)30031-5/

From her conclusion:

...would-be fathers are open to knowing about the likely consequences of the medical choices they are making for the ‘angels’ who agree to help them, and what the alternatives are. Yet, if they trust the commercial surrogacy industry to advise them, is it any wonder that the most common path is one that gives the commissioning dads the babies they want while most benefiting the industry, despite the clear costs to the women involved?

Same researcher has blogged on embryo sex selection to create boy babies (ie not for avoiding any sex-linked medical conditions, just for preference) in gestational surrogacy overseas, also pointing to the role of agencies:

Sex selection by gay men using gestational surrogacy: a troubling trend in queer family-making? www.bionews.org.uk/page_144104

Obviously these are tiny samples of individual choices made- it’s anthropology - but they show a grim snapshot for women.

FannyCann · 02/08/2019 10:12

Hi @BernardBlacksWineIceLolly

I don't think any of us have time to answer all 100 + questions! It's one of the off putting things about the consultation that discourages all but those with vested interests to respond.

The person I spoke to at the presentation stressed all answers are welcome even if you only answer one or two questions and of course there is the email option.

I certainly won't be answering a lot of the questions - there's complex legal stuff in there to do with employment and immigration law that I know nothing about.

For me I am interested in maternal health and protections for the mother and also the NHS. So for instance question 71 proposes that there should not be a maximum number of surrogate pregnancies a woman can undertake. The risks of high parity are well known. And someone on another thread pointed out that even dogs are given more protection by law - a licensed dog breeder will lose their licence if they breed more than six litters from a bitch, the kennel club restricts it further to just four. I shall definitely be raising that.

Also that the proposed minimum age is 18. I know, it's the age of adult majority etc but still - I have an 18 year old dd and take a personal view of outrage on that one!

Question 42 suggests lifting the ban on advertising - you may have a view on that.

Building families through surrogacy: A new Law - Consultation
Building families through surrogacy: A new Law - Consultation
OP posts:
FannyCann · 02/08/2019 10:14

Save our breeding bitches!

Building families through surrogacy: A new Law - Consultation
Building families through surrogacy: A new Law - Consultation
OP posts:
BernardBlacksWineIceLolly · 02/08/2019 12:40

Super helpful reply, thanks Fanny

JoanOfQuarks · 02/08/2019 19:27

Hi Bernard, I absolutely think even sending a one answer response is of value.

There’s no way that this consultation is not being targeted by the IVF industry and the hundreds of highly paid professionals who stand to make huge money from the commercialisation of buying babies.

We need to in the words of an experienced international anti surrogacy campaigner ‘flood’ them with response. A single answer that voices your complete disgust at this terrible idea is worth a lot.

FannyCann · 02/08/2019 19:49

Well said Joan
I've added the link to a thread Joan started - I had no idea a previous consultation had been gamed by those with a vested interest. It seems this is how consultations work. Keep them quiet so only those with a vested interest no about them and get to reply and then announce how popular the proposals are. Hence the shock when so many women got together and mobilised public information and understanding with help to generate a mass of replies and objections to the GRC consultation (which the government hasn't dared to reply to yet - still chewing that wasp).

The illegitimacy of the ‘Rumplestiltskin’ Surrogacy consultation www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3651968-The-illegitimacy-of-the-Rumplestiltskin-Surrogacy-consultation

OP posts:
BernardBlacksWineIceLolly · 02/08/2019 20:01

Closing date is 27 September I think?

I'll get on it next week after my holiday

FannyCann · 02/08/2019 20:24

"Know about them" obv. Blush

OP posts:
FannyCann · 04/08/2019 16:46

I really want to put together some good replies, to probably just a few of the 118 questions as well as my covering email Joan.

I've been a bit slack over the weekend coming over all dystopian future, I was reading "Consider her ways" by John Wyndham yesterday, last read as a teenager. Actually a world without men is looking rather attractive these days. Listening to the One to one programme on radio 4

One to One - Being a Gay Dad - @bbcradio4
www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0006zt8

I was so shocked at these two privileged men, a lawyer and a BBC journalist - absolutely shameless in their pursuit of buying babies bred by impoverished women across the world, First India then Nepal. They seemed to think they were doing a favour to poor women who had no other means of employment. Right up there with Oxfam employees spending their downtime abusing children - sorry - giving a chance of gainful employment to underage child prostitutes - not just patriarchal entitlement but colonial exploitation too.

It's made me think a lot more about some of the recommendations of this review and what the end plan might be:

The minimum age: 18
No maximum number of babies a surrogate can undertake.
Lifting the current ban on advertising
Consideration of allowing payment to surrogates (as oppose to current "expenses" only)

Could it be that there is a view that unintelligent women sitting in their council houses having large families at the taxpayer expense would be better occupied being paid to carry children for other people and saving the state from the expense of supporting a large brood of ill educated problem children?

That the idea of a class of breeders servicing the elite is the actual plan?

You can dismiss me as mad but I have been thinking about some of the societies depicted in books like The Brave New World. Often in books there was a dramatic event, a war maybe or a virus wiping out large numbers of the population, something that prompted sudden changes in the ordering of society.

In reality it is more likely to happen incrementally to a sleeping, unaware population. Just like the GRA was meant to be. Normalising and commercialising surrogacy arrangements is one such incremental step: I recently read an article (sorry, no link) in one of the weekend magazines about a Hollywood IVF/surrogacy specialist. It mentioned how there is a growing trend for "social" surrogacy. That is women choosing to use a surrogate rather than take time off work and have their own baby. Increasingly common among actresses and models whose bodies are their career. Also being supported by some of the big companies, like the tech giants, sold as being benevolent employment terms, paying the surrogate costs for a woman so she doesn't need to take time off work.

The problem with this is that as the use of surrogates is normalised then it becomes increasingly abnormal to just get pregnant and have your own baby. It pressures women to conform to new societal norms.
Think how Linda in the Brave New World was shamed and disgusted by her pregnancy and birth.
This is our future, except for the breeding class of course.
Do we want a society like that? I truly think this is what is at stake here!

So I am still mulling over responses to the consultation. I think I may attend the next consultation event in Birmingham. Meanwhile I have rather cheekily emailed one of the Gynaecology/Obstetric consultants at work that I know slightly with details of the consultation. I haven't a clue what her views maybe, (for all I know she may be rubbing her hands at the thought of lots of private practice it will generate) but I bet she knows nothing about it at all. I just alerted her to the fact of the consultation and asked her view on the optimum number of pregnancies a woman should be allowed.

Back to ploughing through another chapter. I think I will go through the questions and draw up a numerical list of the key questions to answer as a start.

OP posts:
FannyCann · 04/08/2019 16:49

Thanks Chatty I was confused about different dates. More time for us to mobilise some responses.
On the plus side, from Joan's post "It takes as it’s premise for ‘no debate’ the fact that it got 340 positive responses to a previous unadvertised consultation a few years ago."

We can game 340 responses I'm sure!

OP posts:
JoanOfQuarks · 05/08/2019 07:28

It’s definitely more of a Brave New World dystopia we’re being pushed towards; the separation of humans from their biology, the removal and shaming of the role of mothers, the brainwashed unthinking premise of ‘empowerment’ by carving up women’s reproductive function and attempting to outsource creation.

Thanks for making such a good start on the consultation Fanny. And yes, we really need to get a tidal wave of responses back to them.

FannyCann · 07/08/2019 03:02

I've read through all the questions. A fair few are specifically for people with experience of surrogacy etc and there are some complex legal issues. Hardly any medical considerations - it's not clear to me how much they have consulted with anyone like for instance the RCOG.
And there is NO mention at all of the egg donors that they will need.
I aim to start wading through some answers and I think I will just post points here as I go along and save the whole to a document I can link.
Annoyingly I won't be able to go to the Birmingham consultation event. I encourage anyone interested who can to go along.
I

OP posts:
JoanOfQuarks · 08/08/2019 07:57

Well done Joan. I am putting together a hopefully more understandable version of the consultation questions, broken it into 11 parts so that hopefully we can divide the work up.
I’ve noticed the same thing that everything is aimed at asking the purchasing couple for their views. No questions are aimed at the general public or indeed at women - especially the young, poor women of childbearing age who will be the main stakeholders of this drastic change in law.
Mothers have been actively excluded from this consultation which I think is no coincidence.
They don’t want mothers and their safeguarding of babies inconveniencing their massive and profitable monetisation of women’s reproduction.

FannyCann · 08/08/2019 08:12

Thanks Joan It certainly needs an investment of time and thought.
Good idea to complain about the format of the consultation.
I'm hanging back on contacting MPs at present as I want to concentrate on the consultation itself. I think it will be better to tackle MPs when Brexit is out of the way and they can clear their heads to think about other stuff. The recommendations won't go to parliament until next year anyway as they have to review the consultation and draw up proposals for changes tot the law after that.

OP posts:
FannyCann · 08/08/2019 09:32

Joan I'm aiming to complete my answers by the end of the month then maybe in September we could focus on sharing our answers and encouraging people to put in some replies so we can encourage as many responses as possible.

DM me if you like.

OP posts:
Ineedacupofteadesperately · 08/08/2019 13:49

Mothers have been actively excluded from this consultation which I think is no coincidence. They don’t want mothers and their safeguarding of babies inconveniencing their massive and profitable monetisation of women’s reproduction.

Completely agree with this. It's virtually impossible for someone with very little free time to complete, clearly aimed at only a certain type of 'stakeholder' (the ones with money who want to buy babies or profit from it).

Thanks so much Fanny and Joan for all the time, effort and thought that has gone into this. I really want to respond to this but only ever get so far until I need to do something for my own kids and the summer holidays mean that realistically I can't see putting significant time in until Sept and at least one of them goes back to school.

I found the thinking about so-called 'altruistic' surrogacy very helpful - and really hadn't thought about it from the perspective that everyone gets paid except for the person bearing the most work and risk. When you think of it like that it's absolutely outrageous and I do wonder if it could be considered a breach of human rights / exploitation. I'd love to see the face of any lawyer or doctor involved with surrogacy if we suggested that since it's 'altruistic' their work should be unpaid. But really, it's not altruistic if that isn't the case.

I also agree that no woman who has never been pregnant can possibly give informed consent and yet those who have, and who have children, are not only risking their own health and potentially life but risking the wellbeing of their own children. I do not think this is acceptable. The only logical conclusion is to ban all surrogacy.

I remember vividly the recent thread on here about the high rates of faecal incontinence in this country for women who have given birth - and the stories of women having to live with this - many had to cease employment. I seem to recall it was hundreds of thousands of women affected. This sort of risk could affect a woman's ability to work for the rest of her life and would hugely impact on the life of her DC too. It's not acceptable to risk that just so someone can buy a baby. And this is without even considering the rights of the child born of surrogacy which also I think, if you consider them at all, result in the conclusion it should be banned.

So I think it is outrageous that they are essentially saying 'no debate' on the legality of surrogacy - the public clearly has not be consulted. Many, many countries have banned it. This consultation is a farce.

I tend to agree with Lass that if surrogacy is to be legal (which, like Lass, I absolutely think it should not be) that the mother should be paid very well and insured properly to adequately recompense her for her work and the risks both she and her family bear as a result of the pregnancy both during the pregnancy and any health conditions which may be life limiting and chronic which arise from it. In addition to all NHS and state costs being born by the buying parents (as Lass suggested).

FannyCann · 11/08/2019 10:35

Twitter thread, solicitors touting for business at Pride. Their ramping it up ready for the new laws.

twitter.com/iresisters/status/1160283339506499585?s=21

OP posts:
FannyCann · 11/08/2019 10:40

@Ineedacupofteadesperately

Thanks for your comment. I hadn't thought about the business of everyone getting paid except the surrogate either until it smacked me in the face after that meeting!

I'm going to put some work into my replies today and later in the month when I have some annual leave (stay at home variety Sad) so will gradually start posting suggestions of replies for people to copy.

We really need to get as many responses as possible so I will address that too when my replies are better formulated too - as the information says, even an email response is fine.

Just look at the twitter thread I have linked. Openly touting for business at Pride.

OP posts:
FannyCann · 30/08/2019 19:00

Bump.

I'm nearly ready to post my answers and also Nordic Model Now have just sent me the link to their ten minute upload for people to use as a quick response template.

I'm just looking through it all to see how their answers compare with mine and will post it soon.

Please everyone respond to the consultation if you can.

Also, there is another consultation even in London on 19th September - I have booked the day off and intend to attend.

More soon...

OP posts:
Inebriati · 30/08/2019 21:58

Its so dense, I think I'll have to use this to help and focus on a couple of major points;

How to respond to the UK Surrogacy Consultation in 10 easy minutes
nordicmodelnow.org/2019/08/30/how-to-respond-to-the-uk-surrogacy-consultation-in-10-easy-minutes/

2Rebecca · 30/08/2019 22:14

I've signed up for the Ed one

FannyCann · 30/08/2019 22:21

Ooh 2Rebecca
That's great. Ask some difficult questions I hope. Wink

OP posts:
FannyCann · 30/08/2019 22:26

Inebriati
It is. I'm a bit exhausted with it tbh.
And I'm afraid that some of my answers are like at school when you think you've done a great essay and you get it back and teacher has slashed a red line right through it all "nice essay but you didn't answer the question....0%"
Because most of the questions aren't asking the question I want to answer!
Discussing what expenses could be allowed when actually I want the whole thing banned for instance!

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread