NCT and surrogacy - two men tell us about the birth they wanted

[OhHolyJesus]

The National Childbirth Trust, the place that is often your first introduction to a group where you make friends with other mothers-to-be, the place that tells you about bonding with your baby in the womb, here tells us how two men used a woman's body and how it was for them.

It's thankfully brief, and their 'special friend' gets a mention as their 'surrogate' but sadly not as the 'surrogate mother'.

www.nct.org.uk/labour-birth/dads-and-partners/your-experiences-having-baby-through-surrogacy

'Fertility Equality' is the next human rights movement.

Unfortunately I think you're right - although let's put 'human rights' in quotes there.

We may well be seeing the increasing momentum of a narrative of the 'right' of gay male couples to a woman's body as they themselves don't have the key equipment. Male entitlement.

Maybe this is the reason why these stories are being reported. Just having the baby quietly and discreetly rather than getting coverage in the newspapers wouldn't further the cause.

NCT does not stand for National Childbirth Trust now - it changed its name quite a few years ago and is a parenting charity now. Everyone on the courses is sharing the experience of becoming Parents.

They should change the initials then. Because it's not as described.

And consider starting some courses which are about pregnancy, birthing, and breastfeeding.

In the absence of that they need to be honest what they're about.

A parent who is pregnant and will give birth is in a very different situation to a parent who will not. And these things are not trivial. Mental health issues, physical damage including long term, and death are risks of pregnancy.

I think they need to make it really really clear if they don't focus on the pregnant women any more.

NCT does not stand for National Childbirth Trust now - it changed its name quite a few years ago and is a parenting charity now.

I think they need to make it really really clear if they don't focus on the pregnant women any more.

They certainly do. I can't find anywhere on their website a mention of the meaning of the initials. However the Wikipedia page still states National Childbirth Trust so perhaps they should start with updating that. It also states the charity provides free antenatal and postnatal support and information which is patently wrong as it is well known the classes are charged for.

Who knew two spermatozoa could make a baby? 🤷🏻‍♀️ Thank goodness they didn’t let not having a womb to gestate it in stop them from having the birth they wanted. But you know as long as everyone knew THEY were the parents all is good’

I thought the namechange was from Natural Childbirth Trust to National Childbirth Trust?

@FannyCann

But the content of classes for an adoption group would be entirely different from that of a childbirth (NCT = National Childbirth Trust) group. One would expect some same sex couples in an adoption group.

In a group for preparation for childbirth I would find it not just weird but downright insulting to have the presence of a couple of any sexuality who not only patently do not have to prepare for childbirth, but who are paying a woman to do it for them.

Imagine the Post birth get together, when everyone discusses the horrors of the birth/perineal tears/haemorrhoids/breastfeeding problems and a couple cheerfully sitting there with the baby they bought having NOT DONE ANY OF IT because they paid ANOTHER WOMAN TO DO IT FOR THEM!

I guarantee that if there were any women on the course who were pro/neutral regarding surrogacy before the birth, their feelings will have changed radically post birth. Especially in that period when one is so hormonal and still struggling to sit down comfortably.

I recall soon after the birth of my DD2 the story of the Kilshaws, who bought twin babies from America, babies that had already been sold to another couple before their mother reclaimed them and sold them on to the Kilshaws hit the news. I remember watching the news as I was breastfeeding and bursting into tears and holding my baby tight and feeling so upset for those babies, bartered for, sold twice and now in the care of the social services. It would be very hard to sit in the same room as a couple who paid for a baby, taking it from the woman who gave birth to it as soon as it took its first breath. Even women who have chosen to out their baby up for adoption have the opportunity to hold and cuddle their new baby and often do.

You are correct. I suppose my point was more that, given the numbers involved, it was more likely that adoption prep would be split into LGB groups if parents were as terrified of homophobia as the poster suggested.

Gay adoptive parents face the same but also unique challenges when adopting so it wouldn't be odd for them to have distinct pre adoption preparation. I do accept that it was a bit of tangent.

@Antibles

'Fertility Equality' is the next human rights movement.

Unfortunately I think you're right - although let's put 'human rights' in quotes there.

We may well be seeing the increasing momentum of a narrative of the 'right' of gay male couples to a woman's body as they themselves don't have the key equipment. Male entitlement.

Maybe this is the reason why these stories are being reported. Just having the baby quietly and discreetly rather than getting coverage in the newspapers wouldn't further the cause.

We have already seen examples of this with Ben Pink News claiming to be discriminated against because surrogacy is not free on the NHS for gay men. In typical Pink News fashion he pretended that it was free for non gay couples, that being a gay man was the same as being infertile and that everyone has a right to be a parent.

It's hasn't been Natural for over 60 years. Would you rather it was non-inclusive and turned them away? a lot of the content may not be relevant but then that's often the case in classes. They just want parenting support and that's what NCT offers...

@Quincejam

It's hasn't been Natural for over 60 years. Would you rather it was non-inclusive and turned them away? a lot of the content may not be relevant but then that's often the case in classes. They just want parenting support and that's what NCT offers...

Yes I would. Surrogacy and those who seek to buy babies should be unacceptable. What about if a couple were using a woman traffiked for prostitution and held hostage through fear or financial penalty? Should they be welcomed in order to be 'inclusive'? Would you sympathise with them if they decided their purchase was defective and rejected it? We don't need to be inclusive of exploitative or unethical activities.

Would you rather it was non-inclusive and turned them away?

If this was for the standard preparation for childbirth classes then the answer is YES. How insensitive to the women there, who are going through the difficulties of pregnancy and childbirth, the medical risks and complications, to have a couple there (I would say the same had it been a heterosexual couple) who have outsourced the messy part of the business and are paying someone else to do it.

Some of the post natal courses might be suitable, they obviously need to learn how to look after the baby they bought.
But the NCT Early Days Course states "Becoming a mother is a life changing experience. So help prepare yourself with other new Mums in the same boat." Except this couple are depriving their baby of a mother, not even acknowledging her existence despite her supposedly being "a special friend".

"It was also important that everyone involved understood that it was Mike and I who were Lucille's parents". This is factually wrong as currently the law stands the woman who gives birth is the mother, and if she has a husband he is the father, legally, until the parental order is made. And why would they not acknowledge the contribution of their "special friend". In adoption the concept of "tummy mummy" is widely accepted. Why is even this acknowledgment not accepted in surrogacy? Why behave as if the stork delivered the baby?

I wonder if the people asking "but where is her Mum" were more informed than the couple gave them credit for. Perhaps it was a sly dig at the fact that they have deprived their baby of a mother and don't even acknowledge the existence of the woman/women who created her.

Just left some feedback on the article.

@Quincejam

It's hasn't been Natural for over 60 years. Would you rather it was non-inclusive and turned them away? a lot of the content may not be relevant but then that's often the case in classes. They just want parenting support and that's what NCT offers...

Why not open it up to adoptive parents then? If you want to include all non birth parents. This isn't about sexuality so stop flogging that dead horse. Its about biological reality.

They are not giving birth. They are not the partner of someone giving birth.

I get that the article was probably brutally pruned for the website. I think, having just read it for a second time, that the whole birth plan/insistence on who the parents are bit might really have been about making sure neither of the couple was questioned or asked to leave if things got gnarly; that they got to hold the baby first and weren't shouldered aside.

I'd like to think some of what was pruned out was fulsome appreciation of the sacrifices being made and the inconvenience and pain endured by their special friend. If so, it would have been better left in.

I don't suppose the couple had editorial rights over what went online, either, and I'd like to think we are missing something of the warmth and humanity of the experience they tried to convey, but of course we don't know.

I do worry about the whole concept of a 'right' to parenthood (which nobody has: I was infertile for many years so I know this first-hand) and the growing entitlement felt by many which leads to intractable problems. Problems like, if we decide that an infertile couple or person really is entitled to a baby, who is going to be compelled to contribute gametes and gestate it for them? Who will pay if they aren't wealthy enough to buy the services of biological contributors? Will it be only the wealthy and privileged who can be sure of having children as human fertility levels drop? How do we guard against poor and/or soft-hearted women being exploited? How do we raise children away from a birth mother they never know? How do we help them deal with the knowledge that they weren't given up by a mother who lived but couldn't care for them but by a woman who deliberately conceived/gestated them as part of a transaction?

This is quite a can of worms we've opened!

Great post newlygranny

Under his eye indeed. Fucking horrendous. I abhor surrogacy on all levels - should be illegal to be able to buy a baby.

During the first few months after Lucille’s birth, it surprised me how many times I had to answer the question, ‘but where is her mum?’. I wondered how someone would cope with that question if they had been a new dad who had lost their female partner in childbirth

Well any bereaved father would tell the person asking and they'd all probably share in grief about how awful it was that the mother had died right at the time when the baby needed her the most. Because we all instinctively understand, at a biological level, how important the mother is when the child is born. Everyone would understand that the father is dealing with a terrible situation - the double whammy of his own grief and grief at the loss of the baby's mother at a critical time. It's considered an AWFUL thing to go through for both the child and the father.

In the case of surrogacy the parents of the child CHOOSE to put the baby through that terrible situation. Doesn't really bode well for putting the needs of the child first thereafter.

The quote above suggests that ONLY the father's grief matters, not the baby's loss. Which is a huge red flag.

And not just for humans for ALL mammals like us. It's common to hear people saying about cats and dogs 'they were taken from their mother too early' when they have behavioural issues.

You can't just ignore biology and evolution without consequences.

An excellent post @NewlyGranny.

@IloveJKRowling so true. I will add that adoptive parents are counseled how to help their child over the loss of their biological mother and father.