Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Women's Hour Now - Surrogacy

42 replies

PJsatMidday · 28/10/2019 10:23

FYI

OP posts:
TruthOnTrial · 29/10/2019 11:30

But that's not happening, it's here to stay.

I dont think we should accept that surrogacynis here to stay. Not at all. Neither should we accept that prostituting is here to stay

It should be fought against.

It's grotesque that a child can be so easily discarded. Owning children has become a status. There clearly wasn't any love, but oure selfishness in the minds of those that discarded a baby becausenit wasn't the right one and you can have that one we'll take this one thanks. This one works properly.

All of it is grotesque. I mean, bottom line, this is a process that risks lives, and the surrogate in the other case had to have a major operation.

I would say there is a mental condition present when someone pits others wants ahead of their own well-being and isn't thinking properly, or has some strange fantasised version of reality being played out.

The babies suffer. The mental health of children is not being prioritised and how horrific that just because the woman in the court case wasn't honest about her conception, that was still her baby and that baby needed its mother yet he court just took it away necause apparently she was overly-emotionally involved with her baby?!

I didn't see reports of severe harm to the baby by the mother. The law is not at liberty to just take babies without huge medical evidence.

Just exactly what is this?

FannyCann · 29/10/2019 11:45

The consultation seemed to suggest that there must be a high number of surrogate mothers who change their mind and keep the baby upon giving birth but I'm quite interested to know how many cases there are of that in the UK in recent years and to know how many intended parents change their minds. Who needs protecting with new laws here?

I don't have a reference or stats I'm afraid but I read that in fact it is more common for commissioning parents not to follow through and take the baby than for the surrogate mothers to refuse to hand over the baby.
I'm inclined to believe this. Apparently marital/relationship breakdown is a common reason. And of course no one wants to take a "dribbling cabbage". If anyone can track down any stats on this I'd love to see them.

Dustin Lance Black talked a lot about the reason for changing the law being to "keep everyone safe". Meaning to protect commissioning parents.
The concept of protecting the surrogate mother is a nonsense beyond ensuring they receive their payment. As the law commissioners alluded (my earlier post) if no one wants the baby social services will be expected to step in and sort it.

It's worrying me a lot though as this will chip away and change the definition of being a mother. (I know, obviously adoptive mothers are also mothers, I don't want to derail on this). But if the woman who gives birth isn't a mother what is she? This has wider implications to affect all of us who are mothers (through birth). It was a key point in the rejection of the legal case brought by the trans man Freddy not to be recorded as the mother of the baby. The judge decided the act of being pregnant and giving birth means that person is a mother. So the definition of being a mother is being attacked from that side and also through new surrogacy law. In fact Freddy and supporters cited problems with surrogacy as one of the reasons why they were so upset about the ruling and would continue to fight it.

This is an attack on motherhood and the stays of mothers in more ways than the obvious imo.

SapatSea · 29/10/2019 11:55

I think it's pretty rare. This article mentions the only cases I've recently come across:
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/17/surrogate-mother-changed-mind-giving-baby-must-hand-child-gay/

In both cases the woman didn't want to hand over the child to a gay couple but in both cases the gay couple were given the child as the one of the gay couple was the genetic father. In the first case the woman carried the child and had looked after them until the age of 18 months when the court ruled in favour of the "dad". The child was not from her egg so the judge ruled that she had no genetic link to the child. So no acknowledgement of how a baby grows in the womb and is nourished by the "carrier".

The label "carrier" always bothers me, as if it takes no effort, has no effect. Sort of like it is equivalent to carting around a bag of shopping.

The groth of "social" surrogacy is also an issue that I find incredibly disturbing. Women using other women as "vessels".
www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/may/25/having-a-child-doesnt-fit-womens-schedule-the-future-of-surrogacy

I think it is time to ban it, I know some people are desperate for a baby but the risks to women's rights are too great. Where next? Seeing surrogacy as a type of employment, refusal to take such a "job"could result in withdrawal of state benefits? A near future where in the UK people could be encouraged to sell a kidney, part of their liver or lung? It is basically buying a baby, a human life and I believe a lot of people who engage surrogates see it as just that.

TruthOnTrial · 29/10/2019 12:05

I think if pregnancy and labour doesn't fit a schedule then certainly having the baby won't!

Commodities.

It all.comes down to treat humans like commodities.

Well, babies, and women. Babies the product and women the carriers.

Just commodities, not real lives.

Are these people all psychopaths. I think they are to have lost all compassion for what they are pushing here.

Genetics outweighs the emotional and psychological trauma caused.

Judges don't seem to take much account of psychological and emotional harm when it comes to family court decisions, or rape cases, or .....

They are responsible for a lot of harm to women and children.

Blood is on their hands.

Coyoacan · 29/10/2019 14:14

I think if pregnancy and labour doesn't fit a schedule then certainly having the baby won't

Well that is what nannies are for.

Actually my dd is a dancer, so when she had my dgd was over a year without an income and then it took a long time to get back on the scene again. Still, no excuse for surrogacy.

FannyCann · 29/10/2019 23:12

Thanks for posting that SapatSea

The birth mother and her husband were the child's legal parents and "had the right to change their minds" but that didn't give them the right to keep the child!

Not sure how family life works for the commissioning parents who now have a child but are not the legal parents. Does this mean that even though the child lives with them, the legal parents get to exert influence (if they wish to) regarding things such as medical decisions, vaccinations, passports and trips abroad?

And what exactly are the "identity" needs of a child of gay parents that means he must live with gay parents?

Women's Hour Now - Surrogacy
Lysistrataknowsherstuff · 29/10/2019 23:39

Many European countries have completely banned surrogacy, and I don't understand why the UK is trying to extend it. I do t think the powers that be have considered how attractive to international buyers the UK would be - the surrogate mother will get all healthcare free, very different than the US or even India (not sure of the healthcare system there though).

But if we're extending it, let's pay women properly. The awful woman on the radio likened it to babysitting - I'd say probably more like a nanny, so £20 per hour. It's a 24/7 job, that's £3,360 a week. Let's say 40 weeks, so that's £134,400. As a H&S assessment would conclude that it's an extremely hazardous job, probably should include some hazard pay, and the buyers should take out insurance just in case the mother suffers birth injuries or even death - maternal mortality in the UK is 9 per 100,000.

But I'm guessing when Tom Daley and his husband go on about making surrogacy fairer they don't mean for the actual women do they.

FannyCann · 29/10/2019 23:47

I have just discovered Filia podcasts, and this one with Renate Klein was so interesting. The last five minutes discussing how patriarchal surrogacy is and also debunking issues relating to individual choice over the greater good are spot on. There's also another episode with Jennifer Lahl which is very interesting.

Listen to Renate Klein from FiLiA Podcasts in Podcasts. podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/filia-podcasts/id1461524178?i=1000447756888

GrumpyHoonMain · 29/10/2019 23:56

I think women should be paid for surrogacy, with benefits / pensions / insurances. Surrogacy could then be regulated and if anyone wants to use a surrogate they can then fork out 60-100k to make it happen.

ChattyLion · 30/10/2019 09:34

But it won’t make it any safer for the individual woman, physically or mentally, or the individual child born who may feel massive distress at birth and later in life, or help women to deter who may be induced financially to do it or emotionally blackmailed into it, just to add on a massive price tag which may mean fewer people go for it in the UK. They will just go abroad if it’s cheaper and more easy to use a woman abroad.

ChattyLion · 30/10/2019 09:35

*or ‘help to deter’ women

TruthOnTrial · 30/10/2019 11:12

It needs banning.

Certainly medical ethics should be sitting and the default always be the baby stays with the birth mother.

Any other ruling undermines a birth mothers legal position.

Well, just maybe thats the point huh?
Well, just no, no, no. Absolutely no way. It needs to stop, and no money at all should change hands.

If no money changes hands this will mean any that donit under the radar can be charged for using women as 'carriers of products'

The whole thing is so distasteful, all dressed up as Im so kind and altruistic. You are giving away the baby thats only know you. Knows your smell, voice and rhythms intimately. Bonded to your body.

To abandon that baby to someone else is not altruistic or kind in any sense of the word. Its cruel and heartless to the baby, and the babies needs are ignored in preference for other adults.

Its also psychologically damaging for the growing childs identity. Sometimes they don't feel right and that something's wrong. Spend their lives searching for the woman who gave birth to them.

IcedPurple · 30/10/2019 21:28

So Ricky Martin and his partner have taken to Instgram to 'welcome' their latest child.

No mention of the woman who carried and gave birth to him. You'd swear the stork brought him.

www.instagram.com/p/B4OC0ViHwNz/?utm_source=ig_embed

FannyCann · 30/10/2019 23:08

I've transcribed some of the closing discussion from the Filia podcast I linked earlier, which I think summed it up so well.

Listen to Renate Klein from FiLiA Podcasts in Podcasts. podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/filia-podcasts/id1461524178?i=1000447756888

Renate Klein talking to Heather Brunskell-Evans
R: I think at the end of the day, surrogacy is a deeply patriarchal institution and basically who it profits most is men. I’ll give you one example, say you go to the USA , to the states that allow commercial surrogacy, as a heterosexual couple and you have this child made by this woman, and you pay her, and then you want to take this child back to Australia. In the case of Australia all you need to do is to go to a consulate or an embassy, and the man has to do a DNA test, and if his genes are in the baby, he is then declared the father and the baby gets an Australian passport. The birth mother, (the surrogate mother) doesn’t have to be there, nor does it matter if the female partner of this man, if it’s her eggs that are in this baby or if they used an egg donor. It’s the erasure of women, it’s the erasure of mothers at the same time. And really that’s what it’s about, it’s basically men wanting their precious genes in their own babies.
H: Gasps, Yes.
R: That’s what it comes down to.
H: To conclude, what it’s brought up, talking to you, is the ways in which it has become quite impossible to talk about this in the same way it’s quite impossible to talk about prostitution without culturally returning it to the individual. What I think you’re wanting to do, what I like to do in my own research is look at the broader social issues and say that we can’t make decisions on the basis of what the individual chooses or wants, because all of our choices, all of our laws, have to be made on the basis of the greater good, as it were. And it’s very difficult for people to hear that, and to also to hear that there is a relationship between what we all do personally and larger social structures and capitalism. These kinds of discussions are shut down now, I think, on the basis that, as you said earlier, you’re phobic if you make any criticism at all about an individual person’s choice.
R: I’m agreeing with everything your saying. Of course I didn’t mention capitalism before but that’s what it is. It’s a growth industry in male liberal capitalism and you’re absolutely right, it’s all about “sorry, who are you to tell me I can’t have my child, I want my own child with my own genes”. And when you look at what this does to the collective women, many people say “I don’t care about that, I just want my child and who are you to talk to me like this” and that’s when the name calling comes in, “you’re just a bigot, you’re mean or you don’t have any empathy”.....

So many people are such individualists, narcissists and couldn’t care less.
And of course, what we haven’t said, is it’s extremely expensive, the whole process. The surrogate mother only gets a pittance, even if it’s a paid surrogacy.....so the people who can even envisage going down that road have to be rich. They almost always are either white or they are members of the ruling class or the group who is in power. Surrogate mothers are often of a different skin colour and certainly of a different economic and educational class as well.....
It’s a grubby grubby industry that is really only set up to make money under the guise of saying “oh but we’re helping so many desperate people”.

TruthOnTrial · 31/10/2019 13:24

Thanks for post that transcript.

Surrogacy really is a deeply patriarchal institution

Yes, the stork theory is gaining popularity at an alarming rate.

SapatSea · 31/10/2019 16:29

Thanks Fanny that podcast is spot on.

SapatSea · 31/10/2019 16:36

images.app.goo.gl/uddSoCs4KEUhaV8g

One for patriarchy! Hmm

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread