To not understand the issue with surrogacy?

[Blackbird1234]

I've seen a few posts on some threads in this topic, from people condemning surrogacy. I don't understand why it is seen as bad, if all parties consent. Can anyone explain, please?

Because poor women in poor countries are exploited by wealthy western couples.

Because renting someone's body is unethical despite any notion of consent. Should be be able to consent to life changing pregnancy complications or even death?

Because it's not in the child's interest, it's all about the adopting parents.

The baby that is being brought into the world with the intention of ripping it from its mother and the only home its ever known does not get to consent to the situation.

Some people on here seem to believe a woman is incapable of willingly making the decision to carry a baby for another person and seem to think every surrogate is a slave to their body/ made to do it... etc.

Because it is a commodification of a human life and a woman's body.

Yeah that's why loads of really wealthy women sign up for it out of pure altruism

So how about if it was a rich couple using another rich woman as a surrogate - would that be viewed in a better way?

Unethical or not, surely with something like this as long as there is full consent from all parties it should be fine?

Both genuine questions, not snippy replies.

Would a baby really notice that its new mother is not the one it was grown in? I don't have children, so genuinely don't know.

So how about if it was a rich couple using another rich woman as a surrogate - would that be viewed in a better way?

How often do you think that actually happens?

How does the child consent?

We adopted a kitten recently. I signed up to load of cat rescues and one of them has a social media campaign atm called "eight precious weeks" raising awareness of kittens taken from their mothers too early.

But we think it's fine to do that to a human baby.

Economic unfairness since women selling their bodies and/or eggs are far worse off financially than those buying them.

Health risks to the mothers.

Couples having a say in, or even dictating, what mothers should/shouldn’t do with their bodies.

DCs not having access to the identity of their biological parent(s).

Risks to DC due to being removed from their birth mother.

If all parties consent and it is a voluntary offer by someone who knows the person who wants a child (sister having a child for childless and desperate sister, for instance) then I think there is nothing wrong with it.

If it is a wealthy Westerner using the body of a woman in a poor country and paying money, then it's just another form of slavery; twice over, because the mother's body is bought and the child is also bought.

If you read the section on "Targeting the vulnerable" at www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-47826356
you will get an idea of the purely practical objections, even leaving to one said any question of the mental health of either mother or infant.

Because think of all the children who were adopted in the 1950s, 1960s and1970s and who have suffered because of the way it was handled because we didn't know better at the time.

Because think of all the children born from sperm donation in the 1970s and 1980s and who have suffered because of the way it was handled because we didn't know better at the time.

We know now children who are removed from their mothers at birth suffer. We know now children who do not know about their biological/genetic history suffer. We know selling children is wrong. And yet surrogacy is suddenly absolutely fine and doesn't harm the children involved at all?

one side. Curse the speelchock

So how about if it was a rich couple using another rich woman as a surrogate - would that be viewed in a better way

Thin end of the wedge right there.

What is actually happening is that poorer women with fewer economic opportunities in Eastern Europe (Ukraine for example) and Asia (India for example) are being paid to participate in a risky proposition, pregnancy is inherently risky in terms of both morbidity and mortality especially in poorer countries to make available babies for rich western people. It is exploitation. Among many other issues for the children which we have already experienced in countries where forced adoptions took place widely in the past.

@Blackbird1234

Would a baby really notice that its new mother is not the one it was grown in? I don't have children, so genuinely don't know.

Yeah, it would. It knows its mother's scent, her heartbeat, her voice. She's all the baby knows.

surely with something like this as long as there is full consent from all parties it should be fine?

what is consent? in most cases money changes hands

can I buy you? why not?

can I buy a ten year old? a five year old? a two year old?

at what age does it become not OK for a person to be for sale?

@Blackbird1234

Would a baby really notice that its new mother is not the one it was grown in? I don't have children, so genuinely don't know.

Yes, absolutely. Prenatal attachment is very important.

I think OP that when a lot of people hear 'surrogacy' they think about the current British model - the kind of thing you read about in the paper where a sister has had a baby for her sister. This is heavily regulated in the UK and, by law, hardly any money changes hands and the baby is part of a wider family and still in contact with their surrogate. I don't think many people have an issue with this, it's not something that would upset me as a person or a feminist.

But the kind of surrogacy that is becoming more and more prevalent is where rich people from the UK pay for surrogacy from abroad, where it is much, much more of a commercial enterprise. There is a huge power imbalance, and essentially it's baby farming. There was a terrible story in lockdown about a nursery full of babies just being left alone in their cots because their 'parents' couldn't get into the country because of lockdown. There was also another extremely disturbing story about an Australian 'parent' refusing to take a surrogate baby because the baby had been born with a disability. That's just two stories from an issue that's becoming increasingly commodified.

You say what if all parties consent? Who’s asking the baby? He or she is a person too but being treated by an item.

Surrogacy is a process which does not consider the mother and baby at its very heart. Abandoned babies suffer terribly psychologically, even if they have good carers. To deliberately separate a baby from its mother soon after birth is psychologically damaging. It ignores the bond newborns have with their mother and the importance of breast feeding (where possible) www.routledge.com/Why-Love-Matters-How-affection-shapes-a-babys-brain/Gerhardt/p/book/9780415870535?gclid=CjwKCAiAzrWOBhBjEiwAq85QZzmRf7WB24FppLL6mMdGtdLi1nbWUrNH_iUED3FOSG0NLSMegtOb3BoCWEEQAvD_BwE

There is no consideration given to the child, being denied it's right to a biological family, it's all about creating a baby to order. If the wannabe parent had any interest in children's welfare, they could adopt.

Surrogacy treats humans, both mothers and babies, as a commodity, which is ethically questionable. It objectifies mothers and treats them as 'an incubator'. This objectification, the reduction to no more than a thing, is surely damaging to all women. As such, I cannot see how it has a place in civilised society.

*like an item.

Either for sale or as a gift.

Yes, can’t really have true ‘consent’ if money and/or loss of bodily autonomy is involved.

@Blackbird1234

I've seen a few posts on some threads in this topic, from people condemning surrogacy. I don't understand why it is seen as bad, if all parties consent. Can anyone explain, please?

The baby can't consent.

Even if their were an odd few who did it for a family member etc and not for money, most will be poor women with little choice and women being exploited and farmed like animals to produce babies for anyone with enough cash to pay for them.

You are also assuming that all babies bought are bought with good intentions.

Buying and selling humans of any age is abhorrent.

Even UK surrogacy often involves quite high ‘expenses’.