Altruistic Surrogacy in a family and Medical Negligence in Belgium

[OhHolyJesus]

Through medical negligence a woman had her cervix removed by mistake and so pursued surrogacy as a way to have a child.

Her sister in law, Susan, offered to have a baby for her, though I'm not clear if it was an offer freely given and it's not clear from the article if an egg donor was used or if the child is genetically related to the woman and her husband.

"“Susan opted for a planned C-section, which took place on 15th of October 2020. Susan went into hospital as a full able-bodied woman. She was given an epidural during labour. As a result, Susan is now paralyzed and is still in hospital since giving birth to our baby,” Mrs Ogbole-Spittael said."

(An epidural is standard for a C section, rather than a general anaesthetic isn't it?.)

I don't wish to misrepresent the article, there is a focus on the sister in law who gave birth to have been paralysed and unable to return to Nigeria to be with her children but there was also this:

"Despite getting a surrogate to bear a child for them, Mrs Ogbole-Spittael said she is yet to be recognised as the legal mother of the baby, even when her husband has been registered as the father.

She said if Mrs Ogbole leaves Belgium by October without the family completing the legal process, her ability to be the full legal mother of her child would be denied."

The sister in law has young children, aged 3 and 5. An all-round awful story, with the hospital behaving terribly with threatening letters and court action, and medical negligence can happen to anyone and paralysis following a C section/Epidural is rare and clearly there are some complex medical and legal issues at the heart of this - but I can't help thinking about...

The younger brother - he and his wife were trying to help his older sister have a family, instead his children are traumatised, his wife paralysed. How can their relationship survive this?

The surrogate-born baby girl will grow up knowing her birth and her parents desire to have a baby and 'use' the womb of her Aunt, will have caused physical and mental damage to her entire family

The children of Susan have a different mother now, not just because of her paralysis but the regret, guilt, pain and anger will have a huge impact on them as they grow up.

What a tragic story, an example of altruistic surrogacy within families not being so beautiful and happy.

www.premiumtimesng.com/regional/ssouth-west/455958-how-belgian-hospital-mistakenly-amputated-cervix-paralysed-two-nigerian-women.html

This is a really concerning area.

There is a massive push in the media (BBC I'm looking at you) to promote surrogacy.

The approach in the USA is awful. The things included in the contracts.

The risks of pregnancy birth are out of the picture. And it's not just death which is thankfully less common but long term injury, mental health problems.

Ditto getting eggs is a heavy duty process with risks.

The language in USA. Commissioning parents. Gestational carrier.

The increasing framing of having children as a human right which all should be able to do.

Etc etc

I've been saying on these boards for ages that the approach to all this is totally based in the male view.

Forever men have been obsessed with genetics- being the father. Leading essentially to most of the problems women and girls have had forever. But the genetics is all that counts with babies.

For women there's more. Even if it's not her egg then she grows the baby from her body. Shares blood. Calcium from bones etc. The foetus knows her heartbeat, her voice. Her body goes through massive changes, and then there's the birth.

For women this is a pretty massive deal. If you've grown and birthed a baby then you're fundamentally related to it. This is the part that the male perspective ignores and makes a nothing.

I find it so interesting that if there's a nature prog and a newborn mammal is separated from it's mum then that is a Bad Thing. As mammals we recognise that. But when it's a human baby suddenly it's great?

Massive disconnect there.

Yes, but I think it's worse than that, it's the perfect baby as a commodity. We've seen numerous stories of these situations going wrong when the children turn out to have disabilities or other issues. In this case - this woman's other children are not as important to the "purchasers" as the baby and having ownership of it to complete the perfect family. They are presumably wealthier - there is almost always an advantaged/disadvantaged power dynamic.

It's totally about baby as a commodity. TBH I think all sale or giving away of gametes comes down to that. No one wants those things for themselves, they want them to turn them into a baby.

*I find it so interesting that if there's a nature prog and a newborn mammal is separated from it's mum then that is a Bad Thing. As mammals we recognise that. But when it's a human baby suddenly it's great?

Massive disconnect there.*

Agree and not just there - progressive types are fully fourth trimester, breast is best, attachment etc, as are health services, and yet when it comes to surrogacy it's absolutely fine to remove baby from mother asap. Won't make a difference apparently.

And make no mistake the current push and framing etc is all because it's something men want.

Yes women use surrogacy sometimes but no way is that why there's all these it's so fab pieces, moves to alter the law here etc etc

Interestingly as well the changes in terms in surrogacy which distance the woman from the child comes at the same time as changes to language which separate women into their body parts when it comes to reproductive things.

It's all dehumanising and it's all to do with distancing the person from the function.

And these things seem to be supported by the same groups (in the UK at least).

@OhHolyJesus i listened to the report on RTE radio on the Irish couple getting the baby from Ukraine and being allowed to skip the hotel quarantine in anger. I am so upset at the media's one sided discussion re surrogacy and how there is never anything but positivity around it. And the bit from that article you linked to "they had the baby by surrogacy 11 days ago"... i nearly cried reading that - like what happened to the mother! and the poor baby being taken away from her so quickly

I had always said I would be a surrogate for my sisters...and I probably would have gone through with it (though highly doubtful they'd have asked), but it wasn't until hearing story after story like this that I realized no, it's not that simple. It's not the same as if I were to donate a kidney to save my sister's life.

Thanks for sharing OhHolyJesus*