New feminist campaign "Stop Surrogacy Now"

[RabbitOfCaerbannog]

A new feminist campaign has been set up against the commodification of babies and women's wombs for rent - Stop Surrogacy Now. Looks like an important cause to get behind. From Stop Surrogacy Now's home page:

Surrogacy is the social practice where a woman is ‘used’ for her body, her fertility and reproductive capacity to grow and birth a baby without the intention of being a mother to that child and giving that baby away, or ‘gifting’ that child to ‘Intended Parents’.
We see Surrogacy is the sale of a child where any profit is made. No amount of pretending its ‘gestational service’ changes the reality. Commissioning parents want a baby not a service, the baby is the ‘end product’.
Surrogacy as a practice developed from the demand of wealthy, infertile people to have exclusive parenthood of a biological child.

1. exploiting women as baby making machines does not advance women’s rights
2. The child’s right to have a relationship with all its parents are disregarded
3. It perpetuates that same old structural injustice where poor/ vulnerable women are used for the benefit of the wealthy – the power imbalance in surrogacy is a key argument ‘Using a surrogate’ means replacing the only mother a child has ever known. “People who seek a surrogate have a very specific desire…it is not only a desire to raise a child, but also a demand that the mother be absent.” ~ Kajsa Ekis Ekman “Being and Being Bought”

This is the website:

stopsurrogacynowuk.org/2021/04/22/welcome-to-stop-surrogacy-now-uk/

@RabbitOfCaerbannog

young women willing to carry a baby and give birth for somebody else, unpaid (though I expect they received good expenses, at least I hope so). One even said she wanted to do it again!

I think we need to be careful about overstating the benevolent side of this, some women end up giving birth multiple times as surrogates. Is this good for their mental and physical health? What burden are we asking them to carry? What protections are we putting in place for birth mother and baby? What protections against baby farms or unscrupulous operators if commercial surrogacy were brought in. That literally means organisations making money out of renting women's wombs.

"The more pregnancies one has, the greater the risk of a bad outcome that could leave the children that are already born without a mother," said Dr. Philip Darney, director of the Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health at the University of California, San Francisco.

www.livescience.com/16948-duggar-20th-pregnancy-risks.html

Many ivf births are multiple:

The health risks of multiple pregnancies

[[https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/jan/27/multiple-pregnancy-health-dangers?CMP=Share]]iOSAppp_Other

I agree, it is terrifying.

There will always be a genetic component of a child carried within the woman who carries that child.

And if the woman in the child with mitochondrial DNA.

I don't think this is right, is it? If someone else's egg is used, the mother won't have a genetic link to the baby.

That's right. A child born by egg donor and by surrogacy with have 3 mothers.

A genetic one, a birth mother (with traditional surrogacy they are the same woman) and the social mother.

For example, the woman who have the egg could be from Russia, the surrogate mother could be from America and the baby could be born in the States and moved back to the U.K. with commissioning parent or parents and their birth certificate can be reissued.

In the U.K. a parental order is issued if one commissioning parent has a genetic connection. So in this scenario the father could have fertilised the egg and both he and his female partner are registered on the birth certificate:

Apply with a partner
One of you must be genetically related to the child - in other words, be the egg or sperm donor.
You must be one of the following:
• married
• civil partners
• living as partners
You must also:
• have the child living with you
• reside permanently in either the UK, Channel Islands or Isle of Man
You must apply within 6 months of the child’s birth.

www.gov.uk/legal-rights-when-using-surrogates-and-donors/become-the-childs-legal-parent

thanks for highlighting this - it is an area where many people don't really think about the realities - more on a 'isn't that kind' sort of level and then I saw today a 'heartwarming' piece about Kim Cotton, the first official surrogate (?).

It is always very concerning and risky when you link money and babies and I'm not sure as a society we are in a position to have the conversations about this.

The people in charge can't even work out how to use existing protections for the women and children we already have, let alone dealing with a situation this emotive and complex.

*I'm not sure as a society we are in a position to have the conversations about this.

The people in charge can't even work out how to use existing protections for the women and children we already have, let alone dealing with a situation this emotive and complex.*

We're certainly not addressing the ethical issues and potential for exploitation in the public discourse at the moment. Chucking in that altruistic surrogates have agency when you're not prepared to consider what this means on a much wider scale, in a commercial context, with companies benefitting financially from renting out wombs, reveals the paucity of the argument. Commercial surrogacy almost always involves a wealthy purchaser and a woman who is disadvantaged in comparison.

Our friends over on Twitter have caught this thread and have mentioned Cotton in that context.

She was the first women in the U.K. to sell a baby and the Surrogacy Act of 1985 came into law as a result.

She has always spoken of her regret at her first surrogacy arrangement as she not only didn't meet the parents but she doesn't know what happened to the child. They lived in Sweden, so it was an international commercial surrogacy arrangement. I'm not sure if this was true but I've heard she used the money to decorate her house - something about trading a baby for curtains.

www.express.co.uk/life-style/life/550033/Kim-Cotton-first-surrogate-mother-UK-misses-baby-30-years-on

I think we need to be careful about overstating the benevolent side ...Is this good for their mental and physical health? What burden are we asking them to carry? What protections are we putting in place for birth mother and baby?

I noticed this article from 2014 in the link in my previous post.

"I know that when they are older the children will want answers, especially my biological daughter.
"We’ve all decided that being open is the best approach and I’ll answer any questions they might have - but I’ll be clear that I’m not their mum."
But, it seems, she is addicted to being pregnant. "When I’m not pregnant I feel empty and only a baby can fill that void," she added.
"I’m addicted to the buzz of pregnancy and if I can help childless couples at the same time it would be insane not to.
"I won’t stop until my womb falls out."

Nothing like a self-confessed addiction to raise red flags abut someone's mental health and well-being when making huge decisions involving the creation of another human being.

I noticed she was adopted and had a traumatic birth in her first pregnancy of premature twins who has transfusion syndrome. It doesn't take much to see where her motivation lies, when 'altruistic' (this surrogate mother did it all for free according to the article, not even expenses).

www.express.co.uk/life-style/life/476876/Addicted-to-pregnancy-Surrogate-mother-wont-stop-having-children

There was a story in Closer (or something similar) that was just awful.

Young 20 something woman in Georgia (country not state) marries a much older rich man.

She decides she wants lots of children but doesn't want to be pregnant. She 'commissions' 10(!) babies from surrogates. All 10 babies were born within a year.

Each surrogate was paid £1000 and never met the couple.

Woman employs 10 nannies to care for these babies.

Was it this one Twizbe? This was a shocking story so it stayed in my head too. It gets worse as you read into it.

To think there is something wrong - 11 kids at 23 and wants surrogates to grow the rest http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/amiibeingunreasonable/4164145-To-think-there-is-something-wrong-11-kids-at-23-and-wants-surrogates-to-grow-the-rest

Thanks OP. Great to see the campaign hotting up, as it is important to be ready to push back against the Law Commission proposals when they are presented to parliament early next year.

Something I was thinking about (not researched, just musing, so happy to be corrected). But many of the European countries that ban surrogacy are Catholic, eg Spain, Italy, France and presumably were much more strongly so back in the 70's /early 80's and so it would have been easy/expected to nip it in the bud and pass laws banning it in the very early days.

In the U.K. meanwhile, the Kim Cotton case meant that we were on the back foot and bumped into making new laws ASAP with limited time to consider all the ramifications. Gestational surrogacy wasn't a thing back then so I expect the lawmakers thought "oh well, only a few women will do it, once or twice probably for best friends or sisters, it won't be a big thing". Now, because surrogacy has been legal all these years, the proposal to update our laws starts from a place where it is legal and seeks to widen availability. The possibility of banning it isn't on the table.

It puts feminist organisations in a difficult position. If they seek to influence the laws, and prescribe regulations, it gives an implied approval of surrogacy in principle rather than opposing it.

The Prize winning Object essay from last year:

objectnow.org/how-do-altruistic-and-commercial-surrogacy-affect-the-rights-of-women-and-children/

Concludes (my bold):

"Law and policy is developing and changing across the world and it is vital that the rights of women and children are always the foremost consideration. I have argued for an abolitionist approach because a regulatory harm reduction approach does not advance the aim of feminism. Industrialising patriarchal norms is not compatible with a political movement that demands the emancipation of all women. Feminism cannot succeed by sacrificing the most disenfranchised women to patriarchy, restricting its interest to making improvements to the conditions of their abuse. Surrogacy must be prohibited."

I totally agree and yet I fear that if there is a failure to engage and demand certain standards nothing will be achieved as abolition isn't being considered.

Totally agree with this campaign and I’m very disturbed by the mainstream media narrative on surrogacy and how little questioning there is of the ethics surrounding it.

I am copying the newsletter from ICASM, the International Coalition for the Abolition of Surrogate Motherhood.
I think I'll have to do it in sections, as it won't let me post the full letter.
It is a depressing role call of countries around the world that are seeking to legalise and regulate surrogacy.

Dear members and friends,
The news, as you will see, is hot. The United Kingdom and the Netherlands are reviewing their regulatory law with thus facilitating access to surrogacy. Meanwhile Uruguay, Colombia, Mexico, Argentina, Ecuador, Finland and China are seeking to organize it on their territory and thus through, to legalize it.
How can we explain this recent trend which, like a tsunami, seems to overwhelm states that were previously wait-and-see or little concerned?
We can assume three explanations to this : first of all, the pressure of the market, ever stronger through its lobbies as well as that of potential customers, enticed by media propaganda, who demand legislative changes in favor of surrogacy in their country. Finally, the work of the Hague Conference involving governments, through their delegated experts, in an effort to regulate this practice globally and thus make it socially acceptable.
Faced with this tidal wave sweeping away the most elementary considerations of respect for the dignity as well as rights of women and children, the construction of a front determined to oppose it is indispensable.
We invite you to build this feminist front for human rights in your country
and
to join the International Coalition for the Abolition of Surrogate Motherhood to block this globalized practice !
Become a member of ICASM here :
http://abolition-ms.org/en/act-with-us/join-us//_
Follow us on our social networks here :
FACEBOOK : www.facebook.com/surrogacy.abolition//
INSTAGRAM : https://www.instagram.com/ciams_icasm//
TWITTER : https://twitter.com/AbolitionGpaa_
WEBSITE : http://abolition-ms.org/en/home//_

I remember reading the heartbreaking stories about basically baby manufacturing through vulnerable women in the Eastern block somewhere. They gave birth during the pandemic and these babies were in orphanages because they couldn't be collected. Now I'm sure the women were baby making machines, these poor babies ripped away from them had the shittest start in life which will cause issues in the future.

'Altruistuc' surrogacies, normalise the shitty end of the stick surrogacies.

Its so sad.

There was also this story about a baby "stuck" in the US with the birth mother because the purchasing parents hadn't collected her because of Covid. That poor child...

For the biological parents, the entire process of traveling to and from the US to collect their baby could take up to three months, according to Chrislip.
<a class="break-all" href="https://googleads.g.doubleclick.net/pcs/click?xai=AKAOjstFNH1-8IypS_H1F8fETCtCMbvlwW8zbfH6B3HAUQOz6jKy--OkVhrBMR0D3TIUywbi6lCwgAHnQtxvnQXsWoWQvWQl_YVQV3eELtsmshw1-OFFX3EGsBcgQUV2xbWLgxT3GD1Ty_snwT6_8Y4RECM3lStxPHfnk2nM5AjJxpWZqA9I1EGmjlPEp_AOxNKDHKdUptWpgm5ftEnqKE65A3QkYMtWhqT2mc1vdHyVxyDBErSYIerfNO0kAzWdMN705bCACa-4AIu-5S4bELZPGOHyTOx8V_Yr29iHp9bIM79ix932PC99J3H2MnXtCGVepDs&sig=Cg0ArKJSzC5n2z65FKuH&adurl=nypost.com" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">

“I just don’t know if they can take that amount of time off of work,” she said. “I know some people would be like, ‘Well it’s their child,’ but for us, too…our job is our livelihood, and that’s how we pay for things, so we have to work around that for ourselves, too.”

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/nypost.com/2021/03/24/surrogate-caring-for-baby-year-later-due-to-covid-travel-rules/amp/

FrankButchers and Rabbit, the stories you have told here really make me think surrogacy should not be allowed in any circumstances. It is so risky to all concerned, especially the poor child.

I have a child through surrogacy. Everyone is happy and doing well. Child was attached and calm from the beginning. Surrogate enjoyed the process and went on to do it again because she's kind and enjoyed the first time. She was compensated for expenses only and is still a friend. Child knows all about it and accepts it as a normal way to enter the world. Our surrogate definitely didn't want any more children so no broken hearts anywhere. She'd hoot with laughter at the suggestion she was used. This was a life goal for her, along with many other things.

This is the reality for most surrogacy journeys.

This is quite interesting - a global look at surrogacy. I should add I have no idea what the context of this website it, but foudn the map interesting:

ormfertility.com/surrogacy/surrogacy-where-in-the-world/

'The USA and Canada are currently the only jurisdictions fully open to all international intended parents regardless of relationship status, sex or medical need'

I have a lot of research to do around this subject, but my first thought was WTF happened to “my body, my choice?”

It seems fine with sexual freedom and abortion, but not so much with prostitution and surrogacy.

I recognise there are vast situational, legal, and ethical differences here, but if “my body, my choice” is a fundamental right, then surely feminism must follow through on that statement.

@noisasentence

I have a child through surrogacy. Everyone is happy and doing well. Child was attached and calm from the beginning. Surrogate enjoyed the process and went on to do it again because she's kind and enjoyed the first time. She was compensated for expenses only and is still a friend. Child knows all about it and accepts it as a normal way to enter the world. Our surrogate definitely didn't want any more children so no broken hearts anywhere. She'd hoot with laughter at the suggestion she was used. This was a life goal for her, along with many other things.

This is the reality for most surrogacy journeys.

This is the reality for most surrogacy journeys, you are right. We do hear about the horror stories for sure, but they are uncommon.

I am a two time surrogate, thinking of going again. I am also a mother to three children, a solicitor with my own law firm. No socio-economic discrepancies between us and our buddies, no heartache, no drama.

But I had none of that in my own pregnancies/births so...

I remember the feeling of delivering my friends' baby girl and the looks on their faces, 5 years ago - it caught me by surprise the other day and I was actually quite emotional about it. It was one of the greatest moments of my life.

Children are all doing well. So are the grown ups...no drama, no secrets. Maximum effort and love is all.

You can't view bodily autonomy in a vacuum. It intersects with socio-economic, race, class etc In an ideal world - yay we all have freedom of choice. In reality disadvantaged women can be exploited in a capitalist patriarchy that serves the needs and desires of men. It hacks me right off when liberal feminism - which bangs on so much about intersectionalism - fails to analyse who the women are who will ultimately be taken of advantage of in this system. Look at Holbeck in Leeds if you want to understand more about the reality of prostitution. Look at the situation in Thailand before they banned commercial surrogacy to understand the reality for women and babies. It is the ultimate capitalist approach to view women as a commodity and claim that its liberation.

This is the reality for most surrogacy journeys, you are right. We do hear about the horror stories for sure, but they are uncommon.

This is the case under altruistic surrogacy in the UK, but there are also problematic cases here. It is less so in countries where surrogacy is commercialised. America is a basket case on this issue and there is very much a wealth disparity. I do not understand why we wouldn't want to have a conversation about the ethics of creating a power dynamic in which companies will be given the right to rent out women's wombs? And in which babies become their product for sale. It will meet the rising demand, yes, but really what are the checks and balances here? Why aren't we talking about them? There's a major review going on and the majority of the media coverage is all hearts and flowers - why? Because wealthy people in the media and/or their friends use surrogates.

Another thing I'd add is that to be a good liberal feminist one might think that everything and anything can be given a pass because of women's agency. But different women have different levels of agency and it's a luxury view to refuse to see how open to exploitation some women are. Likewise the move towards sexual liberation for women happened within the confines and structures of patriarchy. We didn't dismantle it and build from the bottom up. It's designed, mostly, to serve men. Prostitution, porn, abortion, surrogacy, women's sex based rights are not all the same issue - you don't have to agree with all of them to be a good progressive or a good feminist, it's not a one size fits all - oh the "terfs" and "swerfs" dont like surrogacy therefore I'm obliged as a good Lib fem to think it's FINE. Women put their lives on the line every time they have a baby. They can be left with health issues for life by giving birth. This is not the same as other things. Look at the evidence. These things don't exist in a vacuum.

But you are having a conversation? Someone else spoke. Isn't that ok?

Of course.