Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Famous men and surrogacy

660 replies

Annasgirl · 04/10/2019 10:43

OK, so this is not to bash the specific person involved but last night I was heading to bed and a story came up on my phone - a person from Westlife was announcing the birth of their baby - through surrogacy (he is gay) and showed a pic of him, his boyfriend and the baby - there was no mother.

So, I totally lost it and poor DH had to listen to me rant for about an hour - but when, oh God, when, are we going to stand up and be counted and take back the rights of women and children?????

DH mentioned that there will always be women poor enough to agree to do this and I countered that you cannot sell a kidney (legally) or buy one so why should you be able to buy or sell a baby???????

BTW, DH agrees with me, but why do I feel I am the only person alive who is angry about this?

And I live in Wokesville (AKA Ireland) and I am worried that we are so keen to be woke and the most liberal place to be gay in the world, that we will soon legalise surrogacy or at least make it easy for people to legally buy a baby overseas and then take it home here. That is what the person was arguing for on his gushing post.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
timshelthechoice · 06/10/2019 20:19

here

Lolasaurous · 07/10/2019 02:17

I don't know how I feel about surrogacy. I do have concerns. But to the people who responded to me by saying you're not allowed to sell your kidneys and other organs, correct. You can give them through donation though. You're not allowed to sell babies in the UK either. Surrogacy has to be altruistic (with reasonable expenses paid, not sure if there is an amount), and any contract is not enforceable by law. I hear there may be changes. I haven't looked at what those may be yet. Also, a baby is not one of your organs, so I find that a weird comparison.

www.gov.uk/legal-rights-when-using-surrogates-and-donors

"Overview
Surrogacy is legal in the UK, but if you make a surrogacy agreement it cannot be enforced by the law.

The legal parents at birth
If you use a surrogate, they will be the child’s legal parent at birth.

If the surrogate is married or in a civil partnership, their spouse or civil partner will be the child’s second parent at birth, unless they did not give their permission.

Legal parenthood can be transferred by parental order or adoption after the child is born.

If there is disagreement about who the child’s legal parents should be, the courts will make a decision based on the best interests of the child.

Surrogacy agreements
The intended parents and surrogate can record how they want the arrangement to work in a surrogacy agreement.

Surrogacy agreements are not enforceable by UK law, even if you have a signed document with your surrogate and have paid their expenses.

You cannot pay a surrogate in the UK, except for their reasonable expenses."

Lolasaurous · 07/10/2019 05:39

Obviously I think a woman should have and has the ability to make an informed decision. Obviously I'm against exploitation. And I believe the baby should not be removed from her at birth, should be with her as long as possible, ideally she should continue to be involved in the childs life, definitely for the first year. If it's two men, maybe longer, maybe that sounds homophobic but I don't think two men should be able to just use a woman to create a family, and the child needs their/a mother. I'm not saying gay men make bad parents, and I do think they should be able to adopt. Not sure about surrogacy though. And yes, totally against the creation of a market for buying and selling babies/renting wombs. And against the commodification of babies and women. But a woman with full knowledge, carrying a child for another who can't, simply out of altruistic reasons.. people here think that should be illegal?

According to my religion I'm supposed to be completely against surrogacy. I guess you are all better Catholics than me, I'm reading some of the same things here, actually some of you are much harsher than the CC, haha.

"The Catholic Catechism states that a child is a gift not a right, and that surrogacy is "gravely immoral" because a third party comes between the "one flesh" principle that unites husband and wife. In 1987, the Donum Vitae congregation issued a statement on surrogacy, echoing the views of the Catechism and adding that it violates the dignity of the child. A further statement in 2008 through the Dignitas Personae congregation reinforced the teaching that conception should only be a product of conjugal love."
classroom.synonym.com/religious-views-on-surrogacy-12087756.html

"...All technologies which are designed to aid the mechanisms God has given us for procreation are perfectly acceptable, according to the Church. Women and men can take drugs or have surgeries to improve their fertility or their sexual capabilities, for instance.

However, the Church wants to push back against our culture’s understanding that children can be created with technology and distributed via a market. Children are to come as a gift from God via a sexual relationship — instead of being procured as a product or thing. Any reproductive procedure that involves something other than aiding sex and pregnancy within the context of a married couple permanently committed to being the parents of this child together is something the Church insists misses the mark. This includes everything from creating a child in a laboratory to the use of another person as a surrogate to carry the child through pregnancy. The fact that some of us will not be able to be biological parents is a painful one, but the Church claims this is one of the hard truths that we must endure if we believe that children are gifts with their own inherent dignity — rather than things we have the right to purchase on the open market."

bustedhalo.com/questionbox/does-the-catholic-church-support-the-use-of-a-surrogate-mother-to-have-a-child

"WATERLOO, Wisconsin, May 30, 2017 – Surrogacy is a "moral evil" that commidifies human beings and subverts the natural relationship between husband and wife, Bishop Robert Morlino of Madison, Wisconsin, explained to the faithful earlier this month.

Morlino, known for his vocations-attracting orthodoxy, said this in a talk at Holy Family parish on May 18.

Morlino has a doctorate in moral theology and is on the Board of Directors of the National Catholic Bioethics Center.

Pink & Blue Surrogacy and Fertility recently moved to Waterloo. The company, which a local media report explains "works with straight and same-sex couples and single people," charges $15,000 to coordinate a surrogate pregnancy.

"The entire process can range from $75,000-$125,000 from start to finish," Pink & Blue's website says. An "Abortion/Selective Reduction Fee" ranges from $500 to $3,500.

Although surrogacy may seem like "an act of charity" because it provides couples with children, it's not, Morlino said.

The creation of a new human being within marriage is a "safe space" for God, Morlino said. Surrogacy disrupts the "sacred circle" of marriage by inserting a third party into what should be between husband and wife. Similarly, in-vitro fertilization and artificial insemination aren't morally permissible, he said.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches, "Techniques that entail the dissociation of husband and wife, by the intrusion of a person other than the couple (donation of sperm or ovum, surrogate uterus), are gravely immoral. These techniques (heterologous artificial insemination and fertilization) infringe the child's right to be born of a father and mother known to him and bound to each other by marriage. They betray the spouses' 'right to become a father and a mother only through each other'" (CCC 2376).

"A child is not something owed to one," the Catechism continues (CCC 2378).
"2378 A child is not something owed to one, but is a gift. The "supreme gift of marriage" is a human person. A child may not be considered a piece of property, an idea to which an alleged "right to a child" would lead. In this area, only the child possesses genuine rights: the right "to be the fruit of the specific act of the conjugal love of his parents," and "the right to be respected as a person from the moment of his conception."

Morlino encouraged his flock to pray the rosary publicly and privately for the "conversion of hearts in Waterloo," the Madison Catholic Herald reported."
www

FannyCann · 07/10/2019 06:49

@Lolasaurous

One of the reasons there is so much discussion about this on Mumsnet is the law Commission Consultation on new surrogacy laws in the uk. Proposals which seek to remove the protections which the law currently provides.
A key tenet is drawing up contracts which will make the commissioning parents the legal parents at birth, sweeping away the current law which ensures the surrogate mother and her partner are the legal parents at birth.

This also reduces protections to the baby as a post birth application for transfer of parental rights involves closer scrutiny of the commissioning parents with the best interests of the child at the centre.

This directly contravenes recommendations from the United Nations which seek to protect women and babies.

There are just four days left to respond to the consultation. I urge you to do so. Surrogacy in the UK at present is well regulated and closely monitored but new laws will open up the commercial market. They recommend lifting the current ban on advertising for instance.

There is good explanation here as well as a draft reply you can download and send. (It is very time consuming and complex replying thoughtfully to all 118 questions).

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

FannyCann · 07/10/2019 06:50

I could be a good Catholic. Lol. Grin

Tyrotoxicity · 07/10/2019 09:41

I'd be a terrible Catholic - all that stuff about sacred bonds between husband and wife!

I used to think altruistic surrogacy was okay (even offered to do it for a friend once). This was back in the days when I had very little clue about babies, their development, and their needs. Suffice to say the psychological impact on the potential baby hadn't really occurred to me.

Nowadays I'm more inclined to give altruistic surrogacy the side-eye, because it might be a kindness to the woman can't carry her own child, but there's nothing altruistic about creating a baby with the sole intention of taking it away from its mother at birth. It's not a kindness to the potential child.

GardenMan1 · 07/10/2019 11:17

Hi all ... I've just read the comments above and it seems that there's a lack of acknowledgement that men in general can also be parents. Some might even think that there's a slightly anti-male flavour in the thread. Unresolved anger perhaps? Additionally, the dismissal of gay-males as parents is homophobic.
Perhaps even more importantly, I'm curious to know if those of you who have voiced such anti-Surrogacy views, have ever actually met a surrogate, or met parents whose child has been born through surrogacy, or indeed an actual person who was born through surrogacy?
Of course, each of us is entitled to our opinions on any matter. However, righteous indignation that lacks any meaningful experience of an issue, simply comes across as prejudice and discrimination against people whose lifestyles we don't understand. Thus, such opinion is ignorant and offensive.

Loopytiles · 07/10/2019 11:25

It’s not homophobic to be against commercial - or indeed any - surrogacy.

GardenMan1 · 07/10/2019 11:33

That's not what I said, it's what you've made it mean. Read again.

Tyrotoxicity · 07/10/2019 11:34

Not sure how being against surrogacy = homophobia.

I'm sure many men make excellent parents regardless of their sexuality. Gay men have various options if they want to undertake a parenting role. Their sexuality doesn't give them a free pass to take babies away from their mothers.

KettlePolly · 07/10/2019 11:49

It's one of those situations where I've changed my view over the years. It seems perfectly benevolent and nice all round... But who's needs are being met? The adults. The child's needs just are not paramount. Adoptees can find it distressing later in life to not have knowledge or a relationship with birth mother and as surrogacy is comparatively new we just don't know what the long term affect this will have on the babies as they grow in adults, and no one cares sufficiently to put a halt on the practice, because the adults needs are so profound (and primary).

Of course gay men are just as loving and capable as any other parent. Of course the children are loved. I feel the same unease at women who have a baby on their own via anonymous sperm donor. It's making a decision to remove a biological parent from their lives and these things do matter otherwise no adoptee would seek out their birth parents and we know many do.

NotTonightJosepheen · 07/10/2019 12:06

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

GardenMan1 · 07/10/2019 12:18

It's totally obfuscating my original comment to have only picked up on the reference I made to homophobia.
Nurturing and care of a baby through the fourth trimester (and beyond) requires a loving adult; a child's primary caregiver does not necessarily have to be female.
You use the term 'exploitation' as if your opinion is fact. You also bandy about the terms 'for sale or rent' ... do you know anything about surrogacy in the UK??

OhHolyJesus · 07/10/2019 12:18

I agree KettlePolly and NotTonight.

My anti-surrogacy views are not anti-Male or homophobic GardenMan because I centre the child, mother and egg donor in my views.

I do think that surrogacy needs to be more regulated, similar to adoption, and we have seen that fail with the recent case of Elsie Skully Hicks. Men and women can be terrible parents. I know one single mother who has had 5 of her children removed and she is pregnant again. I know a gay couple (men) who dote on their child. I know an excellent single mother who had her child with an open sperm donor.

The consultation deals specifically with the laws around surrogacy and my response is not based on any anger issues, what an odd thing to assume.

OrchidInTheSun · 07/10/2019 12:29

You might want to read some of the previous threads on surrogacy @GardenMan1 as we have discussed many of these issues exhaustively.

The 4th trimester should be with the mother. If it's with anyone else it can't really be considered a 4th trimester can it?

RedToothBrush · 07/10/2019 12:30

Oh look a rainbow trojan horse which makes a straw man argument by shouting 'bigot!' to close down discussion of the subject.

To say that being against surrogacy =homophobic and there is no debate, ignores the fundamental rights of women and children in the process of asserting men's rights above women and children.

Honestly it's as if we've not seen this problem with the Rainbow MRAs before...

NotTonightJosepheen · 07/10/2019 12:34

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

GardenMan1 · 07/10/2019 12:46

Here are some examples of the anti-male stance on page 1 of this thread:
... She will then be brought up by two men who have bought her essentially and can have no maternal feelings towards her and no knowledge of what it is to grow up female.
... for example Tyra Banks - in her announcement said 'As we thank the angel of a woman that carried our miracle baby boy for us' - the baby and the mother both celebrated and the mother gratefully thanked. Vs. made invisible - the baby packed up in a box and wheeled away and no mention of the woman who risked her life to bring her into the world.
... picture made me so sad for the baby- selfish people who put their own wants before a baby's needs!!!! That poor soul just wants its mother.
... The picture really fucking annoyed me. A baby being removed from her mother at birth by men.
... Not that I think for a moment in this selfish consumer society we live in now that we will. If the men want to buy themselves a baby then that will be enabled.
... Stop using women.
... I don't know why they chose this image either, they aren't even cuddling her or anything, just wheeling her away from the woman who gave birth to her like a prize they have won at a fair or something.
It does seem like the need to be woke about gay men and surrogacy absolutely trumps the very obvious issues with it though.

GardenMan1 · 07/10/2019 12:48

As for the outrage at my mention of homophobia, I find it interesting that that is the main aspect of my much longer comment that you've chosen to argue against.
Have any of you actually had any contact surrogate families?
Do any of you actually know anything about the surrogacy process here in the UK?

GardenMan1 · 07/10/2019 12:48

There does seem to be an incredible amount of anger in this thread. If you can't see it then it's willful.

NotTonightJosepheen · 07/10/2019 12:49

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

NotTonightJosepheen · 07/10/2019 12:50

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

OhHolyJesus · 07/10/2019 12:51

Ah I see Garden when women care about other women and children we are angry and I assume should shut up and stop being so difficult?

There is no homophobia here, if you can't see that then it is wilful.

ludog · 07/10/2019 12:56

Anger is just another emotion and a very necessary one at times. Many people are angry that women's wombs and children are seen as commodities that can be bought and sold. I don't think your "aha'... angry women!" is the "gotcha!" you think it is.

BingBongSong · 07/10/2019 12:57

Completed the consultation with the help of Nordic Model Now:

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

Swipe left for the next trending thread