In GENERAL terms, all forms of surrogacy, altruistic included, is problematic

[NotBadConsidering]

And requires a woman - adult human female.

MNHQ have made it clear both here and on Twitter that this can be discussed in general terms, with no names being mentioned, even when a person with thousands of followers tweets about it in the public domain.

So please, adhere to the rules and discuss generally why it is an issue. Personally, regardless of the sexuality of the intended parents, even the most altruistic surrogacy arrangement - as in UK law, providing it doesn’t change - is drought with problems. Someone always gives up rights regardless. It’s inevitable. Either the intended parents do during pregnancy, and the mother and child certainly do regardless.

We have strict laws that mean a soon to be born child cannot be removed from a mother unless there are serious concerns for that baby’s welfare, yet in surrogacy, that is always the intention. This is not changed regardless of it being an altruistic arrangement. Nor is the risk to the mother.

And it requires a firm grasp on biological reality to make this happen. Two gametes are required, from one of each of the two sexes. The female sex - which exists despite recent attempts to deny its existence - does all the work and takes the greatest risk in surrogacy, even the most altruistic arrangements. It is therefore baffling how anyone could deny the existence of biological sex knowing this.

So, keeping it general, and not discussing names, please add your thoughts and experiences.

And in advance to those who have previously gone to the effort to discuss their experiences only to see them disappear.

[quote YoBeaches]@FWRLurker won't work.

I have a right to a family and not allowing it is homophobic/transphobic/lesbiphobic. Straight people don't have to share their children with multiple parents so why do we?

Plus, you still need a uterus.

@abigailwendover These days the Intended Parents apply for a parental order which gives them parental responsibility, and the surrogate has to consent, but the birth certificate remains the same.
[/quote]
"Straight people don't have to share their children with multiple parents so why do we?"

Eh? What nonsense is this? Just have a browse of AIBU/Relationships to see how many different types of family set up there are.

If a straight couple had a baby and then split up and one half of the couple married someone else and the baby grew up with that spouse as a de facto parent there would be a similar situation.

But look, if you want to campaign for the law to include a 'third' parent in a way that's more robust (not on the birth certificate but, e.g. some kind of judicial order or other legal document that can grant parental rights to the non-bio parent) that's great - let's all campaign for that.

However, let's not campaign for women being pressured - whether emotionally or psychologically or monetarily - to act as walking wombs and put their own health and life at risk to give someone else a mini-me.

I find it particularly chilling that in a lot of cases sisters are viewed as the de facto option to enable a male couple to have a baby they are both genetically related to.

Jazz Jennings also said (jokingly but how much they were joking is questionable) they wanted their sister to carry a baby for them.

Are we going to see a situation where couples have girls specifically to offer their boys a chance at biological parenthood? It's all starting to get a bit Never Let Me Go,

Yes.

So if a lesbian couple used a known male friend to conceive and he would be listed as the father on the birth certificate, and the two females where married/civil partnership then All 3 would have Parental Responsibility.

For 2 gay men the same applies if they use a female friend, where the men are married or CP and one of them is biological father and on the birth certificate. They all retain parental responsibility

But his usually comes with a plan to co- parent as you suggested, which most don't want.

@SebastianTheCrab apologies I was representing the argument not my actual opinion

The other thing that really pisses me off is people arguing that women's womb should be easily available for rent because 'bodily autonomy'. Because how dare anyone tell a woman what she can and can't do.

But these exact same people are horrified when a woman exercises her 'bodily autonomy' to say that no, she does not want to expose her body to a male, she does not want to share her body in an intimate space with a male, regardless of how he identifies. In that case, women excercising their autonomy are hateful bigots, deserving of sexually and physically abusive threats, arrest and job losses.

The misogyny, gaslighting and hypocrisy is just so unbelievable. Its coercive control, its a form of abuse.

As a fairly liberal person, these threads always fascinate me. Some incredibly pertinent points about a subject which is undeniably ethically contentious - interspersed with some very personal, pointed opinions (for example, that my pregnancy clothing budget was not ‘in the real world‘). Macro arguments about autonomy and altruism mixed up with much more specific “what if” lines of exploration. Some strong relevant personal experiences and links to articles and scientific studies, mixed with much more individual thoughts and reactions, often in very emotive language. To be expected - but sometimes hard to untangle! And I absolutely respect the strong views people hold on this topic.

Overall, I agree with the sentiment that surrogacy is generally problematic - but this doesn’t mean I believe it should be banned. This was my view before I became a surrogate; and as I have mentioned my own experience was incredibly positive, powerful and life affirming.

As someone who has been a surrogate in the UK - I am not “pro surrogacy”. I am not pro much really - within (fairly wide) boundaries I am not that interested in other people’s life choices - but I am pro choice. And I am very much pro supporting informed decisions.

Surrogacy is inherently tricky as there are always questions about power balance, relationship dynamic, control, influence, risk, ethics..... For these reasons I find commercial surrogacy, personally, abhorrent.

What I am very supportive of is significantly enhanced regulation of altruistic surrogacy to support those considering surrogacy (whether potential IPs or potential surrogates) to make informed decisions and access the support they need. This is lacking in this country - and only partially and patchily fulfilled by the surrogacy agencies which exist.

What I am very supportive of is significantly enhanced regulation of altruistic surrogacy to support those considering surrogacy (whether potential IPs or potential surrogates) to make informed decisions and access the support they need. This is lacking in this country - and only partially and patchily fulfilled by the surrogacy agencies which exist.

Which is really poignant that you hold that view as a successful surrogate. The arguments from male same sex and trans couples/activists is that it's heavily regulated today and should to be relaxed.

I used to be in favour of altruistic surrogacy focusing on the gift that parents were being given.
The more child centered I became as as a social worker the more I realized how abusive to a totally vulnerable new born child surrogacy actually is.
The state would only behave like this in the most extreme circumstances and even then contact with the mother in some way would almost always be allowed.
I now believe that surrogacy should be banned as it is abusive to dc let alone considering the renting of female bodies.

how abusive to a totally vulnerable new born child surrogacy actually is.

Yes. I always think of the incident my friends and birth partners told me about post C-section (I was part way down the corridor on a trolly at this point, off my tits on pethidine). DS had been brought back from theatre in his little perspex crib on wheels, and then they brought me back. At the sound of my voice, DS tried to turn his head to see where I was.

I think it's fairly well documented that newborns recognise the sound of their mother's voice, having heard it while in utero.

My youngest daughter also recognized her older sister's voice from the moment she met her. A room full of three midwives, my husband, my mother, my father, my MIL...all coming to see the new baby and it was noisy! The minute my older girl first spoke, "Hello Baby," my newborn (who had been lying in my arms pretty chill and not doing much) turned her head toward her sister and waited for more...she knew her voice.

@Anon992 If you were able to spend most days with your friend, I'm sure the baby knew her voice as well, so it may have minimized the baby's separation (perhaps this was part of your planning). I also think your surrogacy story is unique and you entered into it more aware of risks than most surrogates. I've heard a few genuine surrogacy stories that do not seem particularly exploitative nor cruel. One was a mother who carried her DD's child (her GC). Mums make crazy sacrifices for their children and this was an offer from the mum to her DD (born w/ a damaged uterus) before said DD knew she wanted children. However, in both your story and that GM and DD story, there was potential for abuse - (e.g. the SIL or your friend's husband making demands on your activity/health care), but I see you as lucky. Considering how unregulated altruistic surrogacy is, more women than not wouldn't have the same luck.

I have also heard a story where a sister was being pressured from her entire family and others to carry a child for her brother and SIL, which involved an egg from another woman's body (something I'm very opposed to). She was young, had never had children and just didn't want to keep trying to get pregnant 'until it stuck'. That would have been a very ugly and coercive 'altruistic' surrogacy. If altruistic pregnancies are legal, they need to address this type of family dynamic.

Ultimately, my opposition to surrogacy and egg donation is protecting women from being womb renters and looking out for the best interest of children both in the early stages of newborn and long-term when questions are raised about their biology/origins. The desire to reproduce and to parent is strong, but nobody is 'owed' a child. However, we owe children a right to their biology, a right to the best care, a right not to be a commodity and we owe women the same thing.

@KnightsofColumbusThatHurt

The other thing that really pisses me off is people arguing that women's womb should be easily available for rent because 'bodily autonomy'. Because how dare anyone tell a woman what she can and can't do.

But these exact same people are horrified when a woman exercises her 'bodily autonomy' to say that no, she does not want to expose her body to a male, she does not want to share her body in an intimate space with a male, regardless of how he identifies. In that case, women excercising their autonomy are hateful bigots, deserving of sexually and physically abusive threats, arrest and job losses.

The misogyny, gaslighting and hypocrisy is just so unbelievable. Its coercive control, its a form of abuse.

Absolutely.

The trick that allows this magnificent cognitive dissonance seems to be the underlying belief that women’s bodies have to be useful, providing babies or validation. The choice part is an illusion.

Surrogacy is like prostitution. The narrative is that both are individual decisions that empowered women can choose to make because they have bodily autonomy.

But this narrative fails to take account of the structure and culture within which the individual makes these decisions.

The reality is that the overwhelming majority of women who choose to be surrogates or prostitutes do so for economic reasons. Because they are poor. Because their life choices have been reduced by a sexist society, a failure of education and unequal distribution of wealth. They do it for the money. To live.

It is completely logical for those women to make those choices when the alternative is worse. But those involved in arranging and commissioning surrogacy are exploiting the vulnerability of women with limited life choices. Shame on them!

And no one has the right to traffic a baby into slavery. No-one, not even its biological mother, whatever her choices. Children should not be bought and sold. It is astonishing that this needs to be stated.

Children should not be bought and sold. It is astonishing that this needs to be stated.

Quite.

Some people, generally, might object to the term “buying a baby” and point out it is illegal in the UK. But why does anyone need money then? Why, as an example, would a couple start a fund asking for donations? Apparently the biggest cost for intended parents is the IVF cycle. So are they paying for the IVF cycle? They’re hopefully paying for a successful IVF cycle that results in a viable implanted embryo in a woman’s - adult human female for those who, generally, might struggle with this definition - that results in a baby. So is it not logical to say they’re buying a baby?

There seems to be a belief, generally, from intended parents that because in the UK commercial surrogacy is illegal, the process in the UK of handing over money to initiate a medical procedure to result in an embryo>fetus>baby with 9 months’ use of a woman’s body is somehow a “free” process.

The mental hoops to leap through to think what you’re doing isn’t “buying a baby” and then object to that, generally speaking, is bizarre.

UK already has de facto commercial surrogacy, with a cap on declared ‘expenses’.

i believe that as long as everybody involved is decent and acts decently, and the surrogate is supported and it's their decision, there isn't any reason why surrogacy is wrong.

also who is denying the existence if the female sex?

@acelesbian

i believe that as long as everybody involved is decent and acts decently, and the surrogate is supported and it's their decision, there isn't any reason why surrogacy is wrong.

And I’m sure it would be lovely if the world worked that way but that is quite a naive attitude.

You don’t need to make laws for good people. Laws exist because because bad people exist. And in the case of surrogacy because unscrupulous people who want children exist and desperate women exist.