Media promotes Surrogacy - Australia Radio Example

[OhHolyJesus]

Terry is a gay dad talking about his second surrogate child being born during Covid in Australia.

www.973fm.com.au/local/surrogacy-in-a-time-of-covid-19/

Things that struck me:

The female presenter calls the surrogate mother a 'person', the male presenter calls her a mother. Terry calls her a 'surrogate' and mentioned the 'egg donor', perhaps as a way of explaining that the egg donor is the mother?

Kath comes on the line after Terry and explains that she has two of her own kids and that this is just something their mum does, 'mum has babies'. As she has also been an egg donor they have half siblings and if Kath is not the mother of this child and their older child, but she is an egg donor to others, is she the mother of those other children (assuming those eggs resulted in live births = actual children)? ...I worry about the message that sends to her kids, particularly her daughter.

Terry does say how much it cost, 110k Au$ for two kids which is a bargain as usually it's 80k per child but 'getting pregnant' first time saved them money. Though he says the cost includes counselling it's not clear who had the 3-4 sessions were for and how that worked, nor did he explain the legal process or say how much Kath got in 'expenses'. (Kath is a single mother of 2, working 2 jobs.)

The female presenter ends with "Awwww you're amazing" and Kath recommends surrogacy saying how much she loved it.

This is a brief piece so there wasn't much probing and I'm not a regular listener to know if that was the style or aim of the programme or radio station, but this does perpetuate the view that surrogacy is a lovely, simple process (though expensive) through which couples can have babies. There was nothing on the health risks, for the egg donor or for Kath, not even on the risks around Covid (though the presenters emphasis the stress that caused as if to provoke sympathy). Thankfully Kath did mention that they had discussed what would happen if the baby had medical issues or a disability.

I suppose it's a blessing that Kath didn't have multiple embryos implanted or end up with a multiple pregnancy, and end up risking her own life as it was her 4th pregnancy. I think the presenters were remiss in not bringing the medical side of it to the forefront.

It's fluffy, family friendly spin.

cbc-network.us7.list-manage.com/track/click?u=854a02957234313d134e9865d&id=d2fa7c1b33&e=63ad6d7206

Not so fluffy for this little girl.

This is how it all started...

www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2018/06/her-name-is-monroe-christine

Ok. Copy and paste!

Are the Kids Alright?
by Jennifer Lahl, CBC President

For the little girl who seemed to have everything, little Monroe Christine Lewiss is now front and center of a nasty separation and custody battle, and her father, Jeff Lewis, is reporting that she needs counselingg.
Monroe was born on Oct. 25, 2016, and is nearly 4 years old. She was the product of a four-party commercial contract conception. Let me unpack that.
First are the parents, Jeff Lewiss and his then-partner, Gage Edwardd, both of Bravo TV’s show “Flipping Out.” Monroe is the product of an egg “donor,” a surrogate mother’s womb, and Jeff’s sperm, and Gage is the “other” father. This is the four-party conception arrangement that led to Monroe’s birth. Confused? It can be hard to keep up. But this is the face of the new modern high-tech family.
Since Lewis and Edward split in 2019, they have been locking heads over Monroe in a joint custody battle. She has been bounced between their respective homes when they attempted to share Monroe. One reporter saidd_, “After another arduous court situation where Gage attempted to receive 2-2-3 custody (two nights for Gage, two nights for Jeff and then switching off for three nights between each parent),” however, Lewis is now claiming he is seeing some disturbing changes in his daughter’s behavior.
Perhaps, it’s partially because she is being bounced around like a ping pong ball. Lewis reports Monroe is clingy, while she used to be quite independent. She worries when he leaves, if he’ll return and who will be there when she wakes up from her nap?
In all honesty, this little girl has been set up to struggle since before she was born. Separated at birth from the only mother she had ever known, her birth mother, will induce trauma into any child’s life. Maternal-child bonding is real and scientifically documented in studies.
One article, “How Mother-Child Separation Causes Neurobiological Vulnerability Into Adulthood,” puts it this way, “From this point on, early maternal separation can result in a series of traumatic emotional reactions, during which the child engages in an anxious period of calling and active search behavior followed by a period of declining behavioral responsiveness.”
Not knowing her genetic roots from her biological motherthe woman who supplied her eggs to create Monroecan cause genealogical bewildermentt. That’s described as the longing for identity, kinship, belonging, roots, and self-identity that people who are here because of anonymous egg or sperm donation often feel. It’s often seen in children of adoption, but is also “a term that refers to a state of confusionn and the undermining of one’s self-concept due to lack of knowledge of at least one genetic parent—is considered to apply just as well to offspring of anonymous sperm [or egg] donors,” according to an articlee_ in the National Center for Biotechnology journal Facts, Views, and Vision.
Monroe is having this trauma thrust upon her, as well as being denied all the many things a mother provides that no father can supply, no matter how good the father or fathers may be.
Due to her father’s bad behavior, she was d from a school at the age of 2, and as soon as she’s old enough to do a Google search, she’ll learn that her surrogate mother filed a lawsuitt against Lewis and Bravo TV for filming the birth, without the permission of the surrogate.
The 2010 Hollywood movie, “The Kids Are All Rightt,” with Annette Bening, Julianne Moore, and Mark Ruffalo, tells the story of such an experiment. This movie was an award-winning film at Sundance (think “Cutiess”) and made millions at the box office. The plot is Bening and Moore are a married same-sex couple with children through anonymous sperm donation (Ruffalo).
Their teenage son grows curious and wants to find out who his biological father is. Because his rights to this information will only be given to him when he turns 18, he implores his older sister (also Ruffalo’s child) to help him locate their father. They eventually find their father, there is a bit of tension within this new modern family, but in true Hollywood fashion, the film ends with “the kids are all right.”
In real life, things are more complex and messier. Clearly Monroe isn’t all right now and probably won’t be into her teen and adult years if we look at the data and the facts.
Perhaps Monroe doesn’t really need counseling after all. Perhaps she just needs her mommy and her daddy? But in these messy situations, where adult wants and desires trump the best interests of children, will we be able to even figure out who her mommy is?

I do hate how the egg donor doesn't seem to be humanized in all this. - all humans share 1/2 their DNA with their mothers - that is who an egg donor is - she's not just giving up some cheek cells. If a child of an egg donor ever does an 23andme, she is the person who will show up as "mother".

I'd argue that Mothers who give up their children for adoption are given empathy and acknowledgment for that role. I also see mothers and fathers who adopt their children (especially through open adoption) seem to acknowledge and humanize and often include their child's birth mother. The more you part and parcel the birth process into biological vs egg vs surrogate vs legal parents, it seems the further you pull away from the concept of a mother/child connection and that saddens me at a visceral level.

Delphinium I recommend a wander onto the Donor Conception board...the gaslighting around donor gametes is shocking to me.

@OhHolyJesus Yes. I've lurked a bit and seen some people in serious denial. I have a tough time actively joining in because I think a lot of women who are looking at donor conception have probably been through the hell of infertility and I feel for them, and also am not sure they are at a place to hear anything I'd say.

What makes me infuriated is the donor conception ads on college campuses and other places advertising to young women, and I welcome help actively working to get them banned. Reaching young women is where I think minds can be changed. Vulnerable young women are being lied to about the health risks of egg donation and I find that appalling. I wish MN wouldn't allow those ads on their site.

I am also appalled that donor conception and surrogacy is seen as a human right- it's not. Fighting that is also critical to protect women.

@Delphinium20 I'll message you off the boards...

What makes me infuriated is the donor conception ads on college campuses and other places advertising to young women,

Is that in the UK @Delphinium20 ?
I thought advertising was banned here, although I have seen some.

@FannyCann wow! If it's banned in the UK, it's interesting that MN users can see the ads if they log in from the US (where I'm based). If it's not against MN guidelines I will try to get some screenshots.

When I type 'surrogacy' and 'egg donation' into MN search bar, I get these ads:

Wow @Delphinium20
I'm disgusted. However advertising is legal in the USA and although mumsnet is a UK site I'm assuming these adverts are targeted at USA users.
Unless anyone here in the UK has seen anything like this.

However there are these adverts for egg donors from the London egg bank. See how they groom women to kind, generous, amazing and help other women. When there will be many men wanting those eggs but they don't mention that.

I really must get my act together and complain to the Advertising standards agency about the London egg bank one.
Not sure what can be done about the USA ones apart from complaining to MNHQ, they are running out of money and unlikely to turn down advertisers. Possibly they are seeking to expand more in the USA. This may explain why we occasionally see new threads from (usually gay men) posters from the USA seeking a surrogate mother. It is not legal and these threads quickly get reported and deleted but I have seen one or two.

If the Law Commission proposals go ahead and the ban on advertising is lifted this is what we can expect to see when we log on to Mumsnet.

Our young women will be exposed to worse.

@FannyCann Advertising in the States is not well regulated in this area. I hate how they prey on young women.