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

Surrogate dies in childbirth, leaves behind two of her own kids

676 replies

ConfessionsOfTeenageDramaQueen · 18/01/2020 07:31

"According to the post, Michelle and Chris decided to help another family who wasn't able to have children after they were done having kids of their own.

Michelle was on her second surrogacy for the same family when she lost her life.

Like any other pregnancy, surrogate pregnancies involve the same medical risks of carrying a child and giving birth."

This makes me really angry. Link below.

www.foxla.com/news/california-mother-of-two-dies-giving-another-family-the-gift-of-life?fbclid=IwAR2RgBrXZnWZa1DES4PQWDYMifkY7YCpLy6WVEOoHj6cD145L9Xof1Iy4mI

OP posts:
Thread gallery
13
DuLANGMondeFOREVER · 23/01/2020 16:52

Yep; force.

Obviously only applicable to those who aren’t already doing so willingly, such as the situation described on the British Surrogacy Centre quoted above.

ChewChewIsMySpiritAnimal · 23/01/2020 17:27

The comparison between surrogacy and organ donating from a living person is a bullshit argument. A baby is a living breathing sentient creature. Last time i checked, my liver wasnt. How on earth it can be justified to take a newborn baby away from its mother, the only mother it knows or cares about i have no idea. Aside of course if the child is at risk. Surrogacy should be banned. It's cruel to the baby.

IcedPurple · 23/01/2020 17:44

Also, organ donation saves lives.

Surrogacy only allows a small number of adults to indulge their selfish wish to have their 'own' baby.

So yes, not really comparable.

Langbannedforsafeguardingkids · 23/01/2020 18:05

If a surrogate has a baby for a couple, why do you want them to call themselves the mother when they have no wish to?

Because life isn't about what we all want or 'wish'. If it were I'd be a 6ft tall blonde millionaire.

Reality matters, and REALLY matters to the child. It is already well known that children who are adopted often wish to meet their biological parent and yes, consider their biological parents their parents regardless of what those parents and their adoptive parents want. There's another human being involved FFS, a child.

This statement is very revealing about how little the child matters to those pushing for surrogacy to remain legal.

SHAR0N · 23/01/2020 23:18

@LangbannedforsafeguardingkidsIt is already well known that children who are adopted often wish to meet their biological parent and yes, consider their biological parents their parents regardless of what those parents and their adoptive parents want

That’s not “ well known” at all, it doesn’t even make sense.

Of course children meet their biological parent - it’s hard to be born without meeting your mother.

Yes many adopted children also know their biological parents after they are adopted , some have face to face contact , Others have written contact, photos etc.

So of course they consider their bio parents to be their bio parents , because they are told that’s what they are and that’s the truth.

Same as they know their adoptive parents are their adoptive parents.

I have no idea what you mean by “consider their biological parents their parents regardless of what those parents and their adoptive parents want“.

It’s nothing to do with what anyone wants. It’s biological and legal And historical facts.

Anon992 · 24/01/2020 07:59

It’s clear there are some strongly entrenched views here and - as with any ethical dilemma - there isn’t a clear cut answer, rather many factors to weigh up. Equally there are subtleties and differentiations which need separate consideration and may lead people to different solutions/conclusions - personally I support the law commission’s proposed reforms insofar as they relate to the establishment of a regulator for example, but I do not support the commercialisation via the payment of anything other than expenses. I am pro UK-based altruistic surrogacy, but strongly against surrogacy as an industry in developing countries. Others have different views.

As a parting observation, my experience of Mumsnet message boards is that there is a strong anti-surrogacy stance from a number of very active posters. This negative stance is as odds with the overwhelming positive response I have experienced in real life to my surrogate pregnancy. Clearly my own experience has been shaped by my social circle, my socio-demographic status - and the fact that people are likely to shy away from arguments face to face that they are happy to engage in online. I’m under no illusions that there is an echo chamber effect to take account of. However, the profoundly positive reception my surrogate pregnancy has received from my friends, family, colleagues, the school mums, my children’s teachers, our neighbours and even strangers has been overwhelming, with more than one tear of happiness shed.

Clymene · 24/01/2020 08:03

Honestly? I think most people haven't really thought about it much. They buy into the prevailing 'aww isn't it lovely!' trope that the media perpetuates.

My perspective is because I've read and thought about surrogacy a great deal. My position has been developed from that extensive research, it's not kneejerk.

NotBadConsidering · 24/01/2020 08:18

Anon992

I appreciate your comments and your experience and I think it’s important you recognise that you are in that echo chamber. It’s not uncommon on MN for there to be threads about whether you should mention something to someone who is pregnant, with most people erring that it’s never productive and I can imagine that challenging what you’re doing is something no one with any tact would do. I also don’t doubt from your posts that you’re doing it from a place of kindness.

Maybe it should be compulsory for all those who are intending to be a surrogate to post on MN for honest responses, rather than the watered down or avoided truth from agencies or people who don’t want to be the bad guy.

DuLANGMondeFOREVER · 24/01/2020 08:19

I thought surrogacy was lovely at first.

Now I think it’s utterly revolting and not remotely ethical.

Would I say that to the face of someone who was actually pregnant with a commissioned child? No. Because even if I persuaded her she was wrong, then what? The pregnancy already exists and the physical and mental health is paramount.

Just because no one has said anything anti surrogacy to your face, doesn’t mean they aren’t thinking it.

SHAR0N · 24/01/2020 09:40

@Anon992

If I met someone in your situation in RL I would say something polite to you , like “ I hope it works out ok for you “.

Inside I would be deeply upset for the child you were carrying that was to be handed over to strangers to raise. Because I was in a similar situation to that child and it worked out very badly for me.

You Are focussed on what you want and how you will get it and why everyone should approve of you and your choices. I am thinking of the child and how she will deal with it for the rest of her life. So are many of the posters here that you dismiss with your “anti surrogacy“ label.

You are confusing social politeness with approval.

Langbannedforsafeguardingkids · 24/01/2020 10:30

It’s nothing to do with what anyone wants. It’s biological and legal And historical facts.

I couldn't agree more - I probably didn't word my post as well as I could have sorry for that (my kids have not been sleeping well, my brain isn't working particularly well this week!).

I was disagreeing with a previous poster who seemed to think that if the surrogate doesn't consider herself to be the Mother of the child then her wishes should be paramount. I profoundly disagree. Her being the mother is fact. She doesn't get to choose.

I agree with you that the child's needs should come first and in my opinion they do not and cannot in any surrogacy arrangement.

In all this discussion it just seems clearer and clearer to me that surrogacy is only about the adults wants with no thought for the impact on the child.

SorryAuntLydia · 24/01/2020 10:30

I’ve been lurking on this thread throughout, and have found it hugely informative. Thank you to all the posters.

In the past I have been unthinkingly positive about surrogacy because a very close friend became a mum in this way (she lives in the US). Having put more critical thought into my views I am afraid I am now (privately) judging her choice. I would never say anything to her. My friend is a great mum - but she could have been a great mum to an adopted child.

I believe surrogacy is exploitative of women and is an abuse of children. No child should ever be created with the aim of removing it from its mother. Ever. Because the right of the child should be paramount, I believe surrogacy can never be ethical in any form - and should be banned.

SHAR0N · 24/01/2020 10:59

This is how it’s typically explained to adopted children.

There are different parts of being a mother.

Biological - providing the egg and Gestating and giving birth to the baby
Legal - having the legal right as the child’s parent
Caring - actually parenting the child, caring for child on a daily basis

In some families, the same person does all three parts of being a mum.

In adoptive families, the adoptive mum does the second and third parts. The birth or bio mum does the first.

In some step families, the step mum does the third only. In other step families, she does have some legal rights or even becomes the adoptive mum.

But of course on this thread we are talking about surrogacy and not adoption. So In so called gestational surrogacy, the bio mum can actually be two different women.

In adoption we explain to children that none of their mothers is any more or less real than the others. The role of mother isn’t about feelings, it’s about facts.

That’s why the term “ real mother “ is particularly offensive, as it erases other women and denies the child’s reality.

A women who is a surrogate can say that she doesn't feel like a mother. She of course is entitled to her feelings. But they don’t change the law in her country. And she can’t compel everyone else involved to feel or believe the same as her.

A biological mother whose child has been adopted can feel that she is the real mother and the other/s are fake . But the law and reality say she is wrong. No one is fake, they just do different parts of being a mother.

Well meaning people can encourage an adult adoptee to “ find her real parents”. But their language doesn’t change legal documents or wipe out 20 years of parenting by the adoptive mother.

Feelings don’t trump biology or the law.

As we know, some people are trying to do that in other areas and it’s not working out well for women and children .

DuLANGMondeFOREVER · 24/01/2020 11:33

I agree with most of what you’ve said, Sharon, is ‘real mother’ really offensive though?

I’m a step mother to one and have had two children myself. I don’t think referring to my DSC’s mum as ‘real’ or ‘actual’ diminishes my relationship to my DSC. In fact, I think calling her my DSC’s ‘bio’ or ‘birth’ mum is more problematic as it minimises their connection?

In our house we play with language quite a lot and often invent phrases and metaphors (eldest has ASD and has an enormous vocabulary but thinks very literally and has no understanding of established idioms so we just make up new ones as we go).
We’ve concluded that DSC’s mother gets the title without qualifier (mum/mother etc) and I’m ‘bonus mum’ (and DSC is ‘bonus baby’ despite now being a teenager 😂).
Unfortunately for me, Bonus Mum has been now been contracted to ‘B-um’, which of course is the source of much hilarity for all 3 children!

Langbannedforsafeguardingkids · 24/01/2020 11:39

SHAR0N Great and informative post, thank you.

I completely agree:

Feelings don’t trump biology or the law.

DuLANG - thanks for a much needed laugh I love that you've become 'B-um' - I mean really, what children wouldn't go for that. :) :)

NotBadConsidering · 24/01/2020 11:43

Feelings don’t trump biology or the law

If only this could be pinned at the top of this board, would solve 99% of threads.

SHAR0N · 24/01/2020 11:49

I agree with most of what you’ve said, Sharon, is ‘real mother’ really offensive though?

I’m a step mother to one and have had two children myself. I don’t think referring to my DSC’s mum as ‘real’ or ‘actual’ diminishes my relationship to my DSC. In fact, I think calling her my DSC’s ‘bio’ or ‘birth’ mum is more problematic as it minimises their connection?

In your situation, most people would use the word “ mother “ for DSDs mother. I’m not sure why it needs a qualifier, as she gave birth to the child, has legal rights and I Assume parents the child some other the time.

In this context , I agree that using “ birth / bio mum” would be inappropriate and I think it’s actually quite insulting.

If however you are the legal parent and do all parenting ( and she does none ) then surely you are the adoptive mother ?

I think the word ‘real’ when used to imply that others are fake Or imposters ) is unhelpful and pejorative.

Of course families may come up with pet names for any of these mums, which is a totally different thing.

As long as The children are clear and are told the truth. Lies and deception are harmful.

AnotherEmma · 27/01/2020 20:55

I'm exasperated with this thread but some of you might have more patience
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/AMA/3806707-Im-becoming-a-surrogate-AMA

IcedPurple · 27/01/2020 22:27

That AMA thread... dear lord. So many 'what ifs' and the prospective 'surrogate' doesn't seem to have even considered most of them. But she did say that if the foetus were found to be Downs Syndrome then it would be her good 'friends' 'Uncle Cameron and Uncle Mitchell' - not her - who would decide whether to terminate or not.

Also, she mentioned a 'contract'. I thought surrogacy was not legally enforceable in the UK?

Beerincomechampagnetastes · 28/01/2020 10:05

That AMA thread Shock

op you are so lovely

Ops obviously winning at womanning to some.

Ffs.

It’s exploitation pure and simple, and a total minimisation of the real struggle pregnancy and childbirth are for women.

I’ll put my money on ‘Cam and Mitchell’ not being to friendly soon enough.

HandsOffMyLangCleg · 28/01/2020 10:23

It's an awful thread. Utterly depressing.

The excellent post about choice on one of the first few pages of this thread needs to be posted everywhere.

Choice is an illusion.

Clymene · 28/01/2020 11:09

I had to stop reading that thread.

This article gave me the rage too: www.theguardian.com/money/2020/jan/25/im-a-gay-man-who-spent-150000-to-become-a-dad

This quote: "As far as midlife crisis purchases go, this is the best one!" made me feel really sick

IcedPurple · 28/01/2020 11:29

That article is appalling.

I initially wanted to do it in Canada but, like the UK (where commercial surrogacy is illegal), there are very few surrogates. I eventually chose to do it in California

So basically confirms what I and others have been saying all along. Unless there's a substantial financial incentive, very few women are interested in surrogacy. This despite what PPs have said about all those women who are so desperate to go through 9 months of pregnancy and childbirth just to give the child away, purely because they love the whole process so very much. So much for 'friendship' and 'altruism'. It's a business affair - with an innocent baby the product being traded.

OhHolyJesus · 29/01/2020 09:54

From today and notes the coverage on the Victoria Derbyshire programme coming up now

www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51148421

IcedPurple · 29/01/2020 10:31

So the famous Natalie Gamble, described here as a 'fertility lawyer' and who runs a profit making baby buying business, is on Victoria Derbyshire. Thankfully Julie Bindel is on too.

Swipe left for the next trending thread