Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

To not understand the issue with surrogacy?

987 replies

Blackbird1234 · 30/12/2021 18:29

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?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
13
OhHolyJesus · 31/12/2021 10:20

we are naughty wims in this corner

No one puts Jesus in the corner 😉

FannyCann · 31/12/2021 10:21

Great post @RedToothBrush

OP seems to have genuinely wanted to learn more and I think it is a shame when some posters seem intent on derailing and arguing, targeting "famous" posters. Though I daresay it is educational in its way.

Helleofabore · 31/12/2021 10:21

@RedToothBrush

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….

I'm sorry you think ethics and morality and the rights of women and children are 'boring'. I think that says a lot about you.

Its a shame that you've never really stopped to consider why so many women, talking amongst themselves, have strong views about how women feel powerless and end up in situations where they make appalling 'choices'.

Its funny that for it to be considered a free choice you use the bar of them 'not having a gun to their head'.

At no point does it occur to you that women around the world do it out of desparation and precisely because they lack choices. Offering money to desparate women who are in poverty to do something that might kill them, disable them, mean they are ostracised from society, or because they are threatened by organised gangs is called what again? The word is 'exploited'.

Making a choice requires it to be made freely and not under extreme duress. Poverty and criminal financial gain are massive features here. Anyone who just ignores this as 'boring' really is quite something. We are talking about the human trafficking of babies here.

And then theres 'altruistic' surrogacy. Something that involves people doing it for a friend or family member. How can it be free consent if there is a couple you know in deep distress? This makes women feel emotionally responsible. Thats the very definition of feeling 'under duress' because if you don't do something someone else will be emotionally up shit creek. And it still involves giving up a baby at the end of it which after going through the physical side and mental side of pregnancy and childbirth isnt without consequences even is all goes well. The obligation. The trauma. Which many will surpress, hide or otherwise never speak of but still exists.

Then there's the women with addiction to being pregnant or who feel they need to do this to have purpose in their life and feel like they have done something worthwhile. Noting here that surrogates in this situation generally already have children. You have to question why they feel so worthless and why they are prepared to risk the security of their children - given they might die or have long term health problems resulting from the pregnancy which are no small consideration.

It raises questions about their self worth at the very least. How do you define 'vulnerable' again?

You don't have to have a gun to be coercised. Its very clear you've given no thought or consideration to coercion and how women all too often lack power or are vulnerable in ways that you aren't.

Thats great for you. It says you have a happy, secure life. It says that you feel able to say no. That you have amazing opportunities and choices.

Newsflash: millions of women just don't. They are far more likely than men to live in poverty. They are far more likely to be victims of domestic abuse. They are far more likely to be vulnerable and open to coercision. No guns needed. Good old fashioned emotional blackmail suffices often enough.

And thats without talking about the emotional issues that adopted kids and ivf donor kids have regarding identity and belonging which are hmmm 'pretty well documented'. Babies who have no rights or ability to seek out where they came from in many cases...

But yes its boring to be going through the same arguments constantly with people who are willfully and deliberately blind to the exploitation of women and commodification of babies. Because they lack any degree of understanding, compassion or empathy.

Hey why don't we just legalise modern slavery whilst we are at it. They signed up for it when they decided to enter the country illegally. They knew what they were doing when they got into prostitution. Lets just forget the whole inconvenience and boredom of talking about ethics. Or talking about what constitutes proper consent. I mean that's just life isn't it? And its sad and all that, but people have to survive and its 'doing good' to allow exploitation. I mean that way we never have a problem so we definitely don't have to address it.

This is extreme right wing economic thinking by the way.

The happy ever after family? Do i think it really exists? Well I think it satisfys the desires of those purchasing and procuring babies. Do i think the surrogates themselves do well out of it? No. Not even for so called altruistic surrogacies. I think the lack of voices says a lot. I think the amount of NDA agreements says a lot. I think the close family ties means there's many emotionally hostage and can't state their true feelings in the most honest of ways and they perhaps bottle it up or surpress it in other ways. Whats telling is when surrogate mothers do speak their stories are disturbing in so many ways even if they are supportive of the concept. The language of someone under control seeps through still.

And yes the kids who have not reached an age whether they start to explore this and feel able to challenge the decisions their commissioning parents made. And they too are somewhat held hostage by the very concept that they were 'manufactured to order' and would not exist if they hadn't been commissioned. Are we going to end up with kids who are riddled with over whelming guilt that they are the result of human exploitation?

Yes so sorry your bored by the debate.

Your boredom over the plight of women just reinforces the need to repeat over and over again indefinitely boring you.

Your entire comment above just says 'i want to silence this debate and I do not wish to be told repeated about the nature of human exploitation and coercion'.

The correct response to that attitude is to speak up against it even louder.

Good day to the tone deaf human traffickers and their supporters. We won't be silenced. We wont let you forget the inconvenient truths that surrogate advocates are so keen to white wash (yes a highly appropriate phrase).

The modern day trade in humans looks different to what it did in the past but its still very much alive and kicking.

All of this

It cannot be said often enough. I might just keep quote posting it on every page RedDog.

You have articulated the subversive nature of coercion on so called freely given ‘consent’ very well.

That! That is why we are fighting for women and children in this commodification of humans being dressed up as progressive rights.

Helleofabore · 31/12/2021 10:23

And thank you famous Jesus. You do providth well.

FannyCann · 31/12/2021 10:29

Here is a link to some recent discussions in the media, when women have actually been given a chance to discuss the downsides of surrogacy instead of the one sided view that is usually promoted.

The Law Commission are due to present their recommendations to parliament later this year so I have no doubt we can expect a ramping up of positive stories to promote the narrative. *

stopsurrogacynowuk.org/public-appearances-media/

BlueBrush · 31/12/2021 10:31

(Just breaking my lurk to say thank you to the patient and informative posters on this thread.)

SliceOfCakeCupOfTea · 31/12/2021 10:38

I have an acquaintance who is a tradition surrogate. She's done it 4 times now and about to start her 5th. She had 3 kids of her own too.
Traditional surrogates use their own egg and a/the dad's sperm.
She isn't poor but she does love being pregnant. She actually talks very openly about it on tiktok and can give you an insight into why she does it.

This bothered me somewhat as the babies are all biologically hers. She won't do surrogacy when her egg isn't involved which I just don't understand

Starcup · 31/12/2021 10:39

@OhHolyJesus

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.

Exactly. Some people 'freely' commit suicide, should we let them get on with it, who are we to say they shouldn't die? Some people want an assisted death, should we let them make their own arrangements and not regulate that to ensure there are checks in place?

But that’s the point, some people would like assisted dying to be available here and it wouldn’t surprise me in the coming years if it because a possibility.

For all those that think it’s disgraceful, there are others that think it’s barbaric that it isn’t allowed.

Helleofabore · 31/12/2021 10:42

I'm genuinely interesting in 'altruistic' surrogacy, that's why I asked a high earning surrogate mother more questions about her post.

I shared this earlier, the blog reviewed a BBC programme and explored possible reasons for these women to engage in surrogacy. One single mother did it after being suicidal, another appeared to do it to secure a lifelong friendship with connections that could never be severed, having lost her friends when she became pregnant herself. Her story in particular struck me as she seemed to become powerful through giving someone a baby, like she exerted some kind of control. It was weird.

I, too, am interested in the motivations of altruistic surrogates. I think understanding those motivations expands my knowledge about this topic hugely.

EishetChayil · 31/12/2021 10:43

Because liberal feminism focused on a woman's right to choose rather than dismantling the system of oppression, we now get to choose which oppression we suffer, like a sort of "choose your own adventure" of debasement.

Starcup · 31/12/2021 10:43

@RedToothBrush

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….

I'm sorry you think ethics and morality and the rights of women and children are 'boring'. I think that says a lot about you.

Its a shame that you've never really stopped to consider why so many women, talking amongst themselves, have strong views about how women feel powerless and end up in situations where they make appalling 'choices'.

Its funny that for it to be considered a free choice you use the bar of them 'not having a gun to their head'.

At no point does it occur to you that women around the world do it out of desparation and precisely because they lack choices. Offering money to desparate women who are in poverty to do something that might kill them, disable them, mean they are ostracised from society, or because they are threatened by organised gangs is called what again? The word is 'exploited'.

Making a choice requires it to be made freely and not under extreme duress. Poverty and criminal financial gain are massive features here. Anyone who just ignores this as 'boring' really is quite something. We are talking about the human trafficking of babies here.

And then theres 'altruistic' surrogacy. Something that involves people doing it for a friend or family member. How can it be free consent if there is a couple you know in deep distress? This makes women feel emotionally responsible. Thats the very definition of feeling 'under duress' because if you don't do something someone else will be emotionally up shit creek. And it still involves giving up a baby at the end of it which after going through the physical side and mental side of pregnancy and childbirth isnt without consequences even is all goes well. The obligation. The trauma. Which many will surpress, hide or otherwise never speak of but still exists.

Then there's the women with addiction to being pregnant or who feel they need to do this to have purpose in their life and feel like they have done something worthwhile. Noting here that surrogates in this situation generally already have children. You have to question why they feel so worthless and why they are prepared to risk the security of their children - given they might die or have long term health problems resulting from the pregnancy which are no small consideration.

It raises questions about their self worth at the very least. How do you define 'vulnerable' again?

You don't have to have a gun to be coercised. Its very clear you've given no thought or consideration to coercion and how women all too often lack power or are vulnerable in ways that you aren't.

Thats great for you. It says you have a happy, secure life. It says that you feel able to say no. That you have amazing opportunities and choices.

Newsflash: millions of women just don't. They are far more likely than men to live in poverty. They are far more likely to be victims of domestic abuse. They are far more likely to be vulnerable and open to coercision. No guns needed. Good old fashioned emotional blackmail suffices often enough.

And thats without talking about the emotional issues that adopted kids and ivf donor kids have regarding identity and belonging which are hmmm 'pretty well documented'. Babies who have no rights or ability to seek out where they came from in many cases...

But yes its boring to be going through the same arguments constantly with people who are willfully and deliberately blind to the exploitation of women and commodification of babies. Because they lack any degree of understanding, compassion or empathy.

Hey why don't we just legalise modern slavery whilst we are at it. They signed up for it when they decided to enter the country illegally. They knew what they were doing when they got into prostitution. Lets just forget the whole inconvenience and boredom of talking about ethics. Or talking about what constitutes proper consent. I mean that's just life isn't it? And its sad and all that, but people have to survive and its 'doing good' to allow exploitation. I mean that way we never have a problem so we definitely don't have to address it.

This is extreme right wing economic thinking by the way.

The happy ever after family? Do i think it really exists? Well I think it satisfys the desires of those purchasing and procuring babies. Do i think the surrogates themselves do well out of it? No. Not even for so called altruistic surrogacies. I think the lack of voices says a lot. I think the amount of NDA agreements says a lot. I think the close family ties means there's many emotionally hostage and can't state their true feelings in the most honest of ways and they perhaps bottle it up or surpress it in other ways. Whats telling is when surrogate mothers do speak their stories are disturbing in so many ways even if they are supportive of the concept. The language of someone under control seeps through still.

And yes the kids who have not reached an age whether they start to explore this and feel able to challenge the decisions their commissioning parents made. And they too are somewhat held hostage by the very concept that they were 'manufactured to order' and would not exist if they hadn't been commissioned. Are we going to end up with kids who are riddled with over whelming guilt that they are the result of human exploitation?

Yes so sorry your bored by the debate.

Your boredom over the plight of women just reinforces the need to repeat over and over again indefinitely boring you.

Your entire comment above just says 'i want to silence this debate and I do not wish to be told repeated about the nature of human exploitation and coercion'.

The correct response to that attitude is to speak up against it even louder.

Good day to the tone deaf human traffickers and their supporters. We won't be silenced. We wont let you forget the inconvenient truths that surrogate advocates are so keen to white wash (yes a highly appropriate phrase).

The modern day trade in humans looks different to what it did in the past but its still very much alive and kicking.

You’re conflating soles and car Thor’s there when talking about human trafficking. I get you need to use engine language to get your point across but it’s too far fetched to take you seriously.

The last that have the example her that was a surrogate to her friend or sister was so far removed from anything to do with trafficking etc that it makes you look silly to compare them.

We know this shit happens and it’s an utter disgrace but let’s not make out that it’s always the case.

Starcup · 31/12/2021 10:45

You’re comparing car tyres and apples when talking about human trafficking. I get you need to use emotive language to get your point across but it’s too far fetched to take you seriously

I mean 😂

Starcup · 31/12/2021 10:47

@OhHolyJesus

I could see you were pretty ‘famous’ on your last thread as well with your opinions.

Oh my reputation proceeds me does it? I wonder if that could be in any way related to my research in surrogacy since I came to the subject here in 2019. Just two short years later and I'm Mumsnet famous! Wow. I'd like to thank my fans, MNHQ, all those who supported me. But you too can be an informed individual. You just have to read links outside of your usual sources (mainstream media) and imagine that all is not what it seems...Grin

I seenu put comment about the examples you’ve just given but that happens up and down the country sadly and not specific to surrogacy…

All the links I've shared here (and in other multiple surrogacy related threads - you can check my posting history) are about surrogacy. If you don't read them, that's on you. They are actually 100% specific to surrogacy. This just shows me you haven't and, I suspect won't, read them. Again, no one is forcing you to engage, by gunpoint, nor by financial incentive, or otherwise.

No I’ve wasted enough time on this thread, I’ve got some party food to make 🥳👍
OhHolyJesus · 31/12/2021 10:49

But that’s the point, some people would like assisted dying to be available here and it wouldn’t surprise me in the coming years if it because a possibility.

No, you missed my point again. I was talking about regulation. For those who want assisted dying do you think we should just let them get on with it, it's none of our business, who are we to say what they can and can't do with their lives or planned death?

OR

Should it be tested in law, regulated so oh I don't know, Dr Shipman types aren't left in charge, running a business in it, charging money to kill people with no background checks, safeguarding procedures, checks on whether someone is of sound mind before signing a consent to death contract? (Not I did not say murder).

If regulation is key to ensure safe access who should decide that regulation? The public? The government? One judge? A jury?

Your view appears to be a liberal ones and I have no interest in derailing this thread further so I will leave those questions with you and hope you apply them to your own thoughts and views on surrogacy, but again, no one is forcing you.

felulageller · 31/12/2021 10:52

It's no different from buying a kidney.

Runningupthecurtains · 31/12/2021 10:52

There was a thread on MN a while ago by a woman who was being put under enormous family pressure to be a kidney donor. How could she let X suffer and maybe die when she only needs one kidney? On and on. She was aware that the surgery carries a risk, that while people can live happily with one kidney that there can also be complications. She was the mother of young children and didn't want to put herself at risk but the family would not stop badgering her. She was told that if she went for assessment and told the donor team her feelings that she would be rejected and her family told she was 'unsuitable' but someone without that advice might have been pressured into being assessed, and then if they were a suitable match pressured into going ahead.
No one is saying women can't make a decision just that there can be pressure applied to vulnerable women who aren't fully informed or who can't see that there are other choices available to them. It doesn't mean all surrogates are vulnerable, it doesn't mean women are deemed incapable of making informed decisions it means that we need to be mindful of those that are vulnerable.
In the UK you can't sell organs or children, you can't kill people, or drive when drunk not because we this people are pathetic weak beings that can't make decisions but because as a society we accept that some choices can have negative consequences.

OhHolyJesus · 31/12/2021 10:53

The last that have the example her that was a surrogate to her friend or sister was so far removed from anything to do with trafficking etc that it makes you look silly to compare them.

Exactly. That was an 'altruistic' example.
Dear me, I'm getting tired of spelling this out. The issue in that example was the fact that the women doing a kind thing was left paralysed.

We know this shit happens and it’s an utter disgrace but let’s not make out that it’s always the case.

Yes, you're right, one example is not the majority. But it is one example. One woman is left paralysed as result of engaging in surrogacy. Would you like to know how many have died (that we know about), no? I can share other examples of where surrogacy has gone wrong but I see little point as you haven't responded to multiple questions, shared links, by me and by others.

Go make your party food, you are not engaging in good faith but I thank the OP for doing so, and the lurker for delurking (welcome Smile).

FannyCann · 31/12/2021 10:58

This bothered me somewhat as the babies are all biologically hers. She won't do surrogacy when her egg isn't involved which I just don't understand

It is impossible to regulate so called "traditional" surrogacy as this is usually done via DIY insemination at home and often with minimal legal advice so it is very risky for all parties imo. I don't know what the legal situation is for a woman who, for example, had a one night stand, didn't want the baby but agreed to sign it over to the father and I'd love it if someone with legal knowledge could fill me in on this. But I see the DIY arrangements as essentially the same. I believe they should be covered by adoption law with all the proper checks of the people the baby is being handed over to. At present I am far from sure that any proper safeguards exist in these arrangements.

Furthermore when commissioning parents apply for the legal parentage conferred by a parental rights order then some checks are ordered by the court. Of course by then the baby will have been resident with the CPs for some time and best interests of the baby will normally mean leaving it with the people who have been its primary carers since birth so unless something very bad was uncovered the PR is likely to be agreed even if these people would not have passed the more extensive adoption checks.

I have looked at some CAFCASS reports and I find it concerning that apparently quite a few of these surrogacy arrangements go under the radar as the CPs don't bother to apply for a parental order. Sorry I'm on my phone and haven't time to look for links. I don't know why people wouldn't want to tie everything up legally but I have my suspicions.

OhHolyJesus · 31/12/2021 10:59

My last example and the example from @FannyCann were both 'altruistic' and not commercial surrogacy, so we're not shared as examples of human trafficking snd were shared for the exact opposite reason, to demonstrate and explore what altruistic surrogacy means in response to Star's own comments about women having a choice to do what the want with their bodies.

NotBadConsidering · 31/12/2021 11:01

I remember there was an AMA type thread on MN a year or two ago where the surrogate came on and said she’d just had the embryo implanted for a gay male couple and was happy to answer any questions. She seemed clear it was her choice.

On the first page someone asked her what she would do if the couple died in a car crash before the baby was born. She answered that she hadn’t thought of that possibility Hmm.

Several pages later she came back to say she would give the baby up for adoption.

No forethought, embryo already in, eventualities not considered. That was her choice, to go ahead anyway.

FannyCann · 31/12/2021 11:11

Here's a thread about just such a case @NotBadConsidering
Surrogacy between friends an absolute car crash because no one gave any thought to possible outcomes.

surrogacy has gone wrong www.mumsnet.com/Talk/surrogacy/2188488-surrogacy-has-gone-wrong

FannyCann · 31/12/2021 11:12

I'd love to know the outcome, I wish the OP would come back and update us all.

NotBadConsidering · 31/12/2021 11:20

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/AMA/3806707-Im-becoming-a-surrogate-AMA?pg=2

This is the thread, almost two years ago. A real insight into the lack of thought that can go into these decisions. The OP answers the car crash question from page 1 with the following on page 2 (linked):

Oooo interesting. I’ll ask them. But if I found out my son had a baby and he died before it was born I’d claim it in a heartbeat.

Lovelyricepudding · 31/12/2021 11:24

FannyCann if there is no genetic link then wouldn't that be the same as private fostering arrangements? I am also guessing in the ONS scenario that the mother would remain the mother with parental responsibility and liable for child maintenance should the father choose.

Starcup · 31/12/2021 11:30

@OhHolyJesus

But that’s the point, some people would like assisted dying to be available here and it wouldn’t surprise me in the coming years if it because a possibility.

No, you missed my point again. I was talking about regulation. For those who want assisted dying do you think we should just let them get on with it, it's none of our business, who are we to say what they can and can't do with their lives or planned death?

OR

Should it be tested in law, regulated so oh I don't know, Dr Shipman types aren't left in charge, running a business in it, charging money to kill people with no background checks, safeguarding procedures, checks on whether someone is of sound mind before signing a consent to death contract? (Not I did not say murder).

If regulation is key to ensure safe access who should decide that regulation? The public? The government? One judge? A jury?

Your view appears to be a liberal ones and I have no interest in derailing this thread further so I will leave those questions with you and hope you apply them to your own thoughts and views on surrogacy, but again, no one is forcing you.

There is regulation in the countries where is available. Your point is moot as it’s not available here currently so there is no regulation as it doesn’t exist….

It’s irrelevant what you or I think, some people think it’s unethical to not allow a procedure and others think the polar opposite.

What YOU think personally, isn’t the holy grail of what is right or wrong. I accept this regarding my views too but I’m not ignorant to think I’m right, everyone else is wrong.