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?

I've had IVF, I've seen Kimikos views but they aren't relevant to a debate on surrogacy in the same way as it's not relevant to tell someone they shouldn't take an aspirin because there are crack addicts so I don't feel the need to engage. If it was an IVF thread it would be a different matter.

@KimikosNightmare

I honestly don't care if they have. This thread is about surrogacy- you're the one bringing IVF and (bizarrely)prostitution into it.

I note you haven't even attempted to consider why countries such as Iceland etc have completely banned surrogacy.

Erm I think you’ll find that the only reason I brought it up, was in response to another poster about a different thread! You’ve just jumped on that.

Note what you like, it’s one thing disagreeing to surrogacy and the effects on the baby but it’s quite another to to think IVF is completely wrong full stop.

I can’t be arsed with extreme views like that

@Runningupthecurtains

I've had IVF, I've seen Kimikos views but they aren't relevant to a debate on surrogacy in the same way as it's not relevant to tell someone they shouldn't take an aspirin because there are crack addicts so I don't feel the need to engage. If it was an IVF thread it would be a different matter.

Well it stands to reason that someone that doesn’t believe IVF is ethical and shouldn’t be allowed, will undoubtably feel the same about surrogacy.

You say they aren’t the same, but don’t you understand that some people view any medical intervention as unethical as each other, whether it be IVF or surrogacy.

I don’t wish to engage with such people.

Okay Starcup

You stated that if a woman chooses to do it, you can’t see the problem. So what if a woman chooses to do it, signs a contract with the clause I posted on the previous page, and her partner has no say in life support decisions should something happen to her?

Starcup

"crunchermuncher

This is whataboutery again. No one has said it's ok to not have a father! It's crap. But it's not what was being discussed.

Can you genuinely not understand the difference between a baby being removed from a mother at birth, and never knowing their father? Its not a competition - neither is good.

Your argument seems to be 'bad stuff happens, so we shouldn't try to prevent further bad stuff from happening'.

Is that your argument?

Or are you just trying to make this all about men?

Can you genuinely not understand the difference between a baby being removed from a mother at birth, and never knowing their father? Its not a competition - neither is good

I think your point of view is that a mother even if she’s a shit one, is better than a father (a good one) so on that case I don’t agree with this."

...

How on earth did you draw that conclusion from my comment? I have not said and do not think that a shit mother is better than a father. As others have said, you seem to be conflating mother with mother figure or care giver. Of course a man can be a care giver (my partner was a damn good one) but this doesnt change the fact that removing a newborn from its birth mother straight after birth is traumatic, and this trauma to the child is a direct result of the surrogacy process.

Most of your points have already been addressed upthread but you can't be arsed to read them.

Your entire argument seems to be 'it shouldn't be up to me, so you shouldn't get a say either' - luckily, public policy in the uk is not your responsibility so you can rest easy! However, someone does need to make these decisions (unless you are advocating for anarchy?), which is why this topic, surrogacy, was being discussed. Changes to the law are being considered (in the UK) so it makes sense to consider and debate these - this is politics in action.

If you don't want to have a considered opinion, that's fine, but please don't try and shame those who do by misrepresenting and twisting what we have said.

@NotBadConsidering

Okay Starcup

You stated that if a woman chooses to do it, you can’t see the problem. So what if a woman chooses to do it, signs a contract with the clause I posted on the previous page, and her partner has no say in life support decisions should something happen to her?

That’s up to them. Not my business.

And I am all out of fish.

@Starcup
You said
"But you don’t get to decide because it’s not your choice"

I said
"That's exactly why I posted about law reform of U.K. surrogacy laws on the other thread you and I were on Starcup. The laws of the land are for and apply to everyone."

We were both on that thread and it still stands. I referred there to the Rumplestiltskin thread which details proposed law reform.
It have details of the public consultation of 2019 which is relevant to the subject and would have provided, had you read it, lots of information and links to help you understand both existing laws, proposed changes and what is legal in other countries.

You have consistently conflated IVF and Adoption with surrogacy. Posters have pointed out how they are not the same and I agree with them that the whataboutery is quite something. On the other thread a different poster conflated IVF with cancer treatment and treatment for diabetes, on a surrogacy thread.

This thread and the other thread both had OPs asking and talking about surrogacy. It's clear that IVF is connected to gestational surrogacy but it's the surrogacy the majority of posters have an issue with and are commenting on, not IVF. The other thread was temporarily moved (not at the OP's request) and so I understand why there was so much discussion about IVF, but, going back to the OP here, it is about surrogacy. It is in the title.

You say you don't want to engage with people with "extreme views" and what others do is nothing to do with you. You're alright then, no one is forcing you. Don't worry about women who regret surrogacy, the women who die, the babies who die or are abandoned or live a life where they feel blight. Leave it to us to worry about them.

@crunchermuncher

Starcup

"crunchermuncher

This is whataboutery again. No one has said it's ok to not have a father! It's crap. But it's not what was being discussed.

Can you genuinely not understand the difference between a baby being removed from a mother at birth, and never knowing their father? Its not a competition - neither is good.

Your argument seems to be 'bad stuff happens, so we shouldn't try to prevent further bad stuff from happening'.

Is that your argument?

Or are you just trying to make this all about men?

Can you genuinely not understand the difference between a baby being removed from a mother at birth, and never knowing their father? Its not a competition - neither is good

I think your point of view is that a mother even if she’s a shit one, is better than a father (a good one) so on that case I don’t agree with this."

...

How on earth did you draw that conclusion from my comment? I have not said and do not think that a shit mother is better than a father. As others have said, you seem to be conflating mother with mother figure or care giver. Of course a man can be a care giver (my partner was a damn good one) but this doesnt change the fact that removing a newborn from its birth mother straight after birth is traumatic, and this trauma to the child is a direct result of the surrogacy process.

Most of your points have already been addressed upthread but you can't be arsed to read them.

Your entire argument seems to be 'it shouldn't be up to me, so you shouldn't get a say either' - luckily, public policy in the uk is not your responsibility so you can rest easy! However, someone does need to make these decisions (unless you are advocating for anarchy?), which is why this topic, surrogacy, was being discussed. Changes to the law are being considered (in the UK) so it makes sense to consider and debate these - this is politics in action.

If you don't want to have a considered opinion, that's fine, but please don't try and shame those who do by misrepresenting and twisting what we have said.

No, you’re opinion is that is a disgrace to remove a new born from its mother. You’re quite entitled to such an opinion.

Not every mine sees the world like you and many others in here. The whole debate wouldn’t be happening if there was a blanket ban on it everywhere, but as there isn’t, some places (including the US) don’t view things the same as you.

You keep saying that taking the baby away from its mother when it’s born is the problem (to add I’m not saying it’s a great idea) but what if it’s a heterosexual couple and the new mother is the best friend of the biological mother and is happy to do it?

Someone has posted on this thread if you care to read and said it worked for them. What if a woman had ovation cancer and couldn’t have kids naturally and her friend stepped in and said she would do it?

I know you wouldn’t agree as many others wouldn’t and that’s fair enough, but going back to the original point, people bring in kids to the world in circumstances that will be damaging but that’s overlooked.

It’s a very vocal thread and that’s fine but there’s a lot of judgment and I don’t think it’s as black and white as taking a baby off it’s mother especially if the eggs used aren’t hers to start but belong to the person who will be the child’s mother, even if they didn’t give birth.

[quote OhHolyJesus]@Starcup
You said
"But you don’t get to decide because it’s not your choice"

I said
"That's exactly why I posted about law reform of U.K. surrogacy laws on the other thread you and I were on Starcup. The laws of the land are for and apply to everyone."

We were both on that thread and it still stands. I referred there to the Rumplestiltskin thread which details proposed law reform.
It have details of the public consultation of 2019 which is relevant to the subject and would have provided, had you read it, lots of information and links to help you understand both existing laws, proposed changes and what is legal in other countries.

You have consistently conflated IVF and Adoption with surrogacy. Posters have pointed out how they are not the same and I agree with them that the whataboutery is quite something. On the other thread a different poster conflated IVF with cancer treatment and treatment for diabetes, on a surrogacy thread.

This thread and the other thread both had OPs asking and talking about surrogacy. It's clear that IVF is connected to gestational surrogacy but it's the surrogacy the majority of posters have an issue with and are commenting on, not IVF. The other thread was temporarily moved (not at the OP's request) and so I understand why there was so much discussion about IVF, but, going back to the OP here, it is about surrogacy. It is in the title.

You say you don't want to engage with people with "extreme views" and what others do is nothing to do with you. You're alright then, no one is forcing you. Don't worry about women who regret surrogacy, the women who die, the babies who die or are abandoned or live a life where they feel blight. Leave it to us to worry about them.
[/quote]
It’s their choice. No one holds a gun to their head.

The way some people go on on these sites it’s as if a woman is a pathetic being, who is constantly being controlled and can’t make up her own mind.

It’s boring as sin, hearing the same arguments over and over but but but….

@SphincterSaysWhat

I'm still Involved in the surrogacy world, and it's not all 'women on benefits' being rented by gay celebs.

Do you mind, can I ask how your two surrogacy pregnancies and births went, if you still see the children, what expenses you got paid and whether you would do it again?

I completely understand if you would rather not answer, but given that you posted about your own experience or being a high tax payer and not in the category of a 'woman on benefits' I wondered if you might share some more details? (Not about your income obviously).

ohHolyJ

You live up to your name and have a never ending supply of fish.

It’s boring as sin, hearing the same arguments over and over but but but….

I could say the same about the whataboutery from you! No one has a gun to your head, forcing you to read or engage either.

My concerns come from how I was convinced it was all altruistic and lovely, I hadn't thought about it much. I took the media message at face value and didn't look beyond. Then I did. You don't have to change your mind when you read or learn more, you can stay of the same opinion and think you're right and let that be that. That's also fine. Others, like the OP, want to find out more. Maybe they are just a inquisitive or curious.

If you wanted to read some of the links posted and come back and tell us how you haven't changed your mind then that's also fine. Did you read about the woman who had a baby for her sister in law in Belgium and ended up paralysed? Did you read about the laws in Iceland or the paedophile in Australia who took the baby girl twin and left the baby boy twin? Or read the essay from the altruistic surrogate mother who deeply regrets her pregnancy? Or how in America a woman can be kept as a vegetative incubator if the commissioning parents decide to?

If a woman decides to do it then it's up to her though, sure I get it. If she does then it's her own fault really, she knew what she was getting into. It's nothing to do with you.

@Helleofabore

ohHolyJ

You live up to your name and have a never ending supply of fish.

Or wine.

You won't see a Hollywood star be a surrogate. They only benefit from them

Think about why that is

bears repeating

privileged people hire surrogates

the women they hire are not rich or privileged, that's why they're risking their health for money

@IdontWanna for you - I didn't want to let your comment pass without commenting. Very sorry for your beginnings, I hope you have found your roots or have made peace with it.

Genealogical bewilderment is a horrible thing to live with. It can have a greater impact than some people realise. I hope you have been able to process it somehow, and had the help and guidance that you needed.

That’s up to them. Not my business.

In that case you’re admitting that the act of two people asking a woman to bring a baby into the world for them to remove from her is the Wild West, completely beyond any form of regulation, left for the people themselves to decide. This will inevitably lead to conflict, both legal and moral, and exploitation.

@OhHolyJesus

It’s boring as sin, hearing the same arguments over and over but but but….

I could say the same about the whataboutery from you! No one has a gun to your head, forcing you to read or engage either.

My concerns come from how I was convinced it was all altruistic and lovely, I hadn't thought about it much. I took the media message at face value and didn't look beyond. Then I did. You don't have to change your mind when you read or learn more, you can stay of the same opinion and think you're right and let that be that. That's also fine. Others, like the OP, want to find out more. Maybe they are just a inquisitive or curious.

If you wanted to read some of the links posted and come back and tell us how you haven't changed your mind then that's also fine. Did you read about the woman who had a baby for her sister in law in Belgium and ended up paralysed? Did you read about the laws in Iceland or the paedophile in Australia who took the baby girl twin and left the baby boy twin? Or read the essay from the altruistic surrogate mother who deeply regrets her pregnancy? Or how in America a woman can be kept as a vegetative incubator if the commissioning parents decide to?

If a woman decides to do it then it's up to her though, sure I get it. If she does then it's her own fault really, she knew what she was getting into. It's nothing to do with you.

But you’re removing every responsibility from the woman and placing in the hand of the public, who aren’t involved at all.

Women CAN weigh up the risks.

You say about not discussing anything other than surrogacy (fair enough in general but sometimes things naturally deviate) but such strong opinions that woman are incapable of making informed decisions and we as other women should do it for them, is problematic as well

@NotBadConsidering

That’s up to them. Not my business.

In that case you’re admitting that the act of two people asking a woman to bring a baby into the world for them to remove from her is the Wild West, completely beyond any form of regulation, left for the people themselves to decide. This will inevitably lead to conflict, both legal and moral, and exploitation.

No, I’m advocating for people to stop making out woman are incapable of deciding to do something others wouldn’t chose to do.

But you’re removing every responsibility from the woman and placing in the hand of the public, who aren’t involved at all.

You know women are half of 'the public' right? That would include mothers, surrogate mothers, adopting mothers, single women, lesbians, sisters....

Surrogate mothers, commissioning parents and surrogacy agencies and charities all responded to the initial call for the public consultation. The government asked the law commission to conduct a public consultation prior to reforming the law. It is common practice. Conversion therapy is a recent one you might want to look at, it is still open.

Please do let me know what you think of the other examples I listed. I'm interested to know what you think of the paedophile especially and the paralysed woman especially.

But you’re removing every responsibility from the woman and placing in the hand of the public, who aren’t involved at all

can I buy one of your kidneys please? I'd really like one. Why should the public get to say that's illegal, they aren't involved at all

I think we as a society need to decide on the ethics and morality of surrogacy, just as we do on lots of other issues.

We don't allow organs to be bought & sold.
We don't allow private adoption at all.
Why should we allow surrogacy?

Women CAN weigh up the risks.

The ones they know about yes.

Some whataboutery for you:

Is there are No risks
And
There are No known risks

The same thing?

The surrogate mother Lydia Cox who died, whose husband, Trey Cox, speaks about her pregnancy and death, also said explicitly that she knew about the condition that killed her. So she knew what the risks were, so it's her own fault, just one of those things I guess...🤷🏼‍♀️

Generally we also have regulations in other areas to stop people being taken advantage of due to their lack of through understanding of all the issues (eg financial areas).

No, I’m advocating for people to stop making out woman are incapable of deciding to do something others wouldn’t chose to do.

And if she changes her mind? Has a complication she didn’t think of? Or the conditions change or are changed outside of her control?

And who checks she’s doing it freely and isn’t being coerced?

Just because someone can freely choose to do something doesn’t mean as a society we can just let them do it. There’s a responsibility to protect and safeguard the worst case scenarios.