Single man looking for a surrogate - BBC

[OhHolyJesus]

At 34 he really doesn't need to rush to have a biological child to meet his "burning desire" but he has two embryos on ice with an attractive-sounding egg donor, rather than a partner and I'm sure he hopes the BBC article will mean someone 'comes forward' (don't all rush at once ladies) to grow a "little person" for him.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-56162721

So women need to grow and deliver babies, and possibly risk their lives for:

Infertile heterosexual couples
Gay men
Single men

...and someone will be along to say this is discriminatory against single women with careers soon, thus the new age of social surrogacy is born.

@ErrolTheDragon with this black and white view of surrogacy I would argue they don’t understand or care about actual infertility if they don’t see why some women go on to use a surrogate. And as they trot out the tired trope of ‘just adopt’ while never considering adoption themselves - if anyone has known anyone experiencing infertility they should know you never say ‘why don’t you adopt’

Ah so having children gives them the moral high ground to pontificate to others that they need to just get on without having a child as the parent doesn’t agree with surrogacy while never having to be in that situation themselves conveniently.

Thanks also for explaining to me that as infertile person I can’t understand surrogacy like a mother can as I haven’t gotten this deep understanding they have. 🙄

Ah so having children gives them the moral high ground to pontificate to others that they need to just get on without having a child as the parent doesn’t agree with surrogacy while never having to be in that situation themselves conveniently

The reasons do not do anything to eliminate the reasons why surrogacy is exploitve though. Its not about the would be parents its about the woman that has to carry the baby.

I am not saying I’m in favour of surrogacy. I am not sure. But this blanket black and white view while you sit happily with your own children and have never experienced what it’s like to want a baby with every fibre of your being rankles me.

Thing is, infertility is not like any other medical condition, because fixing the problem of wanting a baby requires making another person. It's not like making a prosthetic limb. And a baby wants its mother- the person whose voice it heard while developing, whose heartbeat and scent it recognises. I decided I was against surrogacy after watching the way my newborn daughter viscerally wanted to be with me, feeling how cruel it would be to deny an infant its needs so that an adult could meet theirs. I decided at the same time I was against rehoming of baby puppies and kittens because people think they're cute and want to raise them themselves.

I found it interesting that the article named women so little. Like the bloke saying he wants ‘someone’ to come forward to be his surrogate. Like what, ‘anyone’ can apply for this...? Don’t they need to be female?

Also if it’s not already been added to the list of groups who could be looking for surrogates in future, we will need to add the children and young people who will have lost their own natural fertility to invasive medical or surgical gender transitioning.

@WineInTheWillows

I am not saying I’m in favour of surrogacy. I am not sure. But this blanket black and white view while you sit happily with your own children and have never experienced what it’s like to want a baby with every fibre of your being rankles me.

Thing is, infertility is not like any other medical condition, because fixing the problem of wanting a baby requires making another person. It's not like making a prosthetic limb. And a baby wants its mother- the person whose voice it heard while developing, whose heartbeat and scent it recognises. I decided I was against surrogacy after watching the way my newborn daughter viscerally wanted to be with me, feeling how cruel it would be to deny an infant its needs so that an adult could meet theirs. I decided at the same time I was against rehoming of baby puppies and kittens because people think they're cute and want to raise them themselves.

Just to clarify, I'm not equating wanting a baby with wanting a puppy here, just saying that having a baby changed my opinion on rehoming baby animals, including humans, unnecessarily.

I didn't say anything about 'moral high ground'.

@WineInTheWillows I am saying if instead of having your baby you instead had 14 miscarriages in a row that it’s unlikely you would have the same view of surrogacy. Instead you might view it as a way for someone to help you bring your baby into the world. Your view is shaped by your nice safe position of saying ‘oh I could never do that’ while having your baby in your arms.

1. Re adoption of babies - love is what makes a family not genetics. I am this babies mother. How do you reconcile that with saying that a baby needs it’s actual mother the one whose heartbeat it knows etc - what if the actual mother is a unfit drug addict? Still cruel to the baby? Or will the baby grow up happy with its adopted loving caring family? Or you believe it will be miserable as it was separated from its mother at birth?

1. Donor eggs - the child has a right to know it’s genetic mother if the child doesn’t know there is evidence the child will suffer psychological damage. But the mother who you say is more important here is the one who carries the child and so she is the mother and the genetic mother is unimportant? If they are both important then why can the child not be happy being raised by it genetic mother and father in a loving caring home? You believe it would be better for a baby to be away from its genetic family growing up? Or not?

1. If a drug addict wants to have children keeps getting pregnant and therefore putting ‘the needs of the adult above the needs of the baby’ causing the babies to go into care and suffer from things like fetal alcohol syndrome - should we promote forced sterilisation to stop them doing that???

It’s not black and white and it’s disingenuous to say it is even more so when you will never find yourself in these situations.

Re adoption of babies - love is what makes a family not genetics. I am this babies mother. How do you reconcile that with saying that a baby needs it’s actual mother the one whose heartbeat it knows etc - what if the actual mother is a unfit drug addict? Still cruel to the baby? Or will the baby grow up happy with its adopted loving caring family? Or you believe it will be miserable as it was separated from its mother at birth?

Sometimes it's necessary for the separation to occur. Some mothers die in childbirth and there's no choice. Some mothers feel they can't raise their baby, for whatever reason. Some are not capable of doing so. At this point, adoption is the least worst option for the baby that already exists. However, creating one to suffer that trauma for the sake of alleviating the suffering of an adult seems to me to be inhumane. A lot of people believe that trauma you don't remember is not important, but I am not one of them.

And yes, I only came to this having watched my newborn and her reactions to the world around her and to me. People are ultimately selfish creatures, so of course I might be more in favour of surrogacy if I stood to benefit from it. That is why society needs to weigh in sometimes- because yes, people are selfish and will generally put their own needs first, but that doesn't make it right to do so.

I haven’t experienced infertility myself, although I have seen close friends go through the terrible pain it causes
However, if my kidneys fail I’m not allowed to buy new ones from a poor person and I shouldn’t be allowed to buy a whole person either

Donor eggs - the child has a right to know it’s genetic mother if the child doesn’t know there is evidence the child will suffer psychological damage. But the mother who you say is more important here is the one who carries the child and so she is the mother and the genetic mother is unimportant? If they are both important then why can the child not be happy being raised by it genetic mother and father in a loving caring home? You believe it would be better for a baby to be away from its genetic family growing up? Or not?

I think the child doesn't know its DNA. It knows the person who gestated it- in this case the biological mother is a stranger to it. I believe law in England also holds the mother to be the one who gives birth, rather than the egg donor?

I think I answered your third point already.

No one has the right to a child. And no one should have the right to buy and sell a baby.

If you carry a baby in your uterus, you are legally that baby's mother, even if the genetic material used to create that baby wasn't yours. During pregnancy, the mother's blood feeds and grows the baby. What she eats (or doesn't eat) have a direct impact on the health of that baby in later life.

We also know a lot about postnatal bonding. A newborn baby recognises its mother's smell and voice. We know that attachment disorder can occur in babies who are separated from their mothers.

None of this is given any consideration in surrogacy. Depriving a baby of its mother to satisfy the wants of an adult is fundamentally wrong.

I think women on this board just are fiercely protective of other women.

But I think maybe this guy has given up too soon. We are always told how much science progress.

According to Medical News Today, most people without fertility issues get pregnant the first month. And healthy people could expect to get pregnant within a year.

I mean, has this person even tried?

I'm probably going to be flamed but I don't agree that surrogacy is a good thing, I never have and I never will.

@Mykidhatespastabake you’ve not been on mumsnet long or even bothered to read this thread if you expect to get get flamed for that view - surrogacy is widely viewed as something unnatural and harmful on here to both the surrogate mother and the baby

@CoffeeTeaChocolate

I think women on this board just are fiercely protective of other women.

But I think maybe this guy has given up too soon. We are always told how much science progress.

According to Medical News Today, most people without fertility issues get pregnant the first month. And healthy people could expect to get pregnant within a year.

I mean, has this person even tried?

indeed

@Jurassicperk infertility is a medical condition classified as such by the WHO. You don’t get to just airbrush it out as not existing to suit yourself.

Seems like a lot of women here ‘once they had their babies’ realised they are against surrogacy - how convenient.

I'm infertile, never even had a pregnancy, and I think surrogacy should be banned.

[quote ChancesWhatChances]@Mykidhatespastabake you’ve not been on mumsnet long or even bothered to read this thread if you expect to get get flamed for that view - surrogacy is widely viewed as something unnatural and harmful on here to both the surrogate mother and the baby[/quote]
Opinions formed on observation, research and lived experience. But sure, wave it away as unkind, selfish or niche.

Maybe ask the women in India who are locked in a house during their pregnancies. Or the babies who are left parentless in Eastern Europe because they were born with disabilities and their biological parents don't want them.

No big deal, right? My choices and all that.

Surely using a surrogate via a company has the same strict checks as adoption?

I’m not sure of the answer to this question but I fear it doesn’t. I’d love to be told I’m wrong. It’s accepted that children up for adoption can face emotional trauma and already have to various degrees so there are lots of controls and hoops to go through to find a suitable parent for them.
I don’t see that language used around surrogacy.

Also you have poor developing countries where companies use poor desperate women to produce babies for those in rich countries. I imagine money is what matters. It reminds me of mail order brides- they have few or no checks on the men buying women. Poor babies and poor women.

Surrogacy is just wrong. Sure you can find cases of close friends or family members who want to do it out of love but those are the exceptions. That’s what they found in Sweden. No one has a right to a child.

My views are the same as wine in the willows. Also as part of my job role we teach parents about bonding with baby during pregnancy and how the baby knows it's mother's voice and smell once born. For me, this knowledge is at odds with surrogacy.

Baby's welfare should take priority over adults ' here.

@ErrolTheDragon yeah women having something men can't wasnt really my point... as that is biology and not up to us. But that is the argument that other people use.
If you think about it like any other organ donation (i.e. kidney). You're allowed to have a family member or willing person donate at great risk to themselves but you can't pay them for it (only reimburse expenses).
Why is money exchanging hands allowed in surrogacy?
Why is the need of a person to have their OWN child with their genes so vitally important? yes, not being able to have a baby is sad etc. But a blind person would experience the same sadness at not being able to see. Does that mean he has the right to buy a poor person's corneas?
Pregnancy and childbirth are very tough on the female body. The is a risk of DEATH and lifetime disability. Treating it as something that can just be paid off ignores this.What happens if the child is born disabled? What happens if the surrogate dies?
Anyone who is willing to put another human being at the risk of dying just to fulfil their desires is selfish and should not be a parent.

@NinaMimi I am from one of those third world countries and my mother works in a hospital. She has seen first-hand what happens when it goes wrong. Surrogate dies and/or baby is born disabled. Rich people from (often Western) countries paying for it abscond and wash all hands of responsibility. People who think money can buy things like this are often the same people who feel no sense of responsbility

[quote WhoStoleMyCheese]@NinaMimi I am from one of those third world countries and my mother works in a hospital. She has seen first-hand what happens when it goes wrong. Surrogate dies and/or baby is born disabled. Rich people from (often Western) countries paying for it abscond and wash all hands of responsibility. People who think money can buy things like this are often the same people who feel no sense of responsbility[/quote]
That’s awful 😢
I’ve heard of a case where there were twins - one healthy and one sick. They took the healthy one and abandoned the other one. Such morally bankrupt people. I wish this would get highlighted more.

Sadly it seems more and more acceptable. Some celebrities who don’t have fertility issues do it to save their body. Their fans look up to them and think that’s a good idea with no thought about the women involved.

@WineInTheWillows how noble of you to ensure that other women who have the misfortune to suffer from infertility be prevented from having a child like you have.