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?

Adam, bought for $8k from a Russian woman had a full passport by the time he reached his first birthday due to the scale of the global baby sex trafficking.

First birthday 3rd birthday. I don't like using the names of the parent traffickers as it makes me sick to think of them but the psychiatrist for one of them said he wasn't a paedophile but was coerced by older partners.

Coercion again. This time as an excuse for horrible child sex abuse.

Are their voices to be ignored? Because they had a good life and so they have nothing to complain about?

Whats the name of the thread on MN about toxic and narcissistic relationships? "We took you to Stately Homes".

What strikes me about famous people who buy babies is just how narcissistic they are. And just how incapable they are of seeing how they are exploiting a power imbalance when they traffick their products. If you have this level of inability to empathise it cannot be a healthy dynamic.

As I said upthread there is this belief - particularly in more affluent circles - that abuse is only physical. Emotional abuse because it doesn't leave a physical mark is much harder to identify and deal with but definitely exists. Those in total denial of it kind of worry me for the most obvious of reasons. Its almost the equivalent of saying "oh don't worry about her, she just walked into a door again. She just does that" when its bloody obvious that someone has been knocked about for the 3 or 4 time by her husband. Or the ubiquitous "she just crazy".

Evidence shows babies bonds with dads when they are the primary carer, I don’t see any evidence that babies given to loving parents who want them are in any way disadvantaged.

I am not quite getting the relevant argument here.

So, because an infant bonds with the dads as primary caregiver (at what age? 3 months? 12 months?) when the mother is still there in that infant’s life, it is ok to remove another child from the only mother they know directly after being born?

Because the new parents love them?

Would you do this to an animal? What about if you took a pup away from its mother and gave it to another dog who loved it? Still ok?

At what point is it ok to take a human child away from its mother because it was created to be given away?

I don’t see any evidence that babies given to loving parents who want them are in any way disadvantaged.

Well there is tonnes of it. So I can only assume that you haven't looked and are just making an assumptions based on your own life experiences. Which is pretty awful really given the subject matter.

PaleBlueMoonlight - thank you for your post. I've been wriggling around on the fence about altruistic surrogacy, but you've helped me understand it must be viewed in a wider context.

What I also have found surprising, is one poster’s attitude that people should not get involved in attempting to protect women and children.

Nothing to do with us directly, so we should all ignore the issues and let those with vested interests set the policy.

What a shock that feminists would be advocating against the exploitation of women and children.

On a feminist board on a parenting ….

Oh. That’s ok, we are not the right kind of feminists!

I forgot.

I know two people who have used surrogates. Both were very wanted babies, they have private schooling and everything they could ever want including two fabulous loving parents. I absolutely see the issue in going somewhere like the Ukraine but both of them had their surrogates in the US and the birth mother wasn't forced into anything. Those kids have a better life than many who are still with their natural parents and so I don't get the problem. I don't see any psychological issues in these kids - it's not like adoption where you grow up with the thought ur parents didn't want you or it's an abusive household. They've had a great start in life and are very much loved and cared for. The baby is created to be born to these parents - it's nothing like selling another human being. They wouldn't exist if the surrogacy process hadn't happened

@flippertyop

I know two people who have used surrogates. Both were very wanted babies, they have private schooling and everything they could ever want including two fabulous loving parents. I absolutely see the issue in going somewhere like the Ukraine but both of them had their surrogates in the US and the birth mother wasn't forced into anything. Those kids have a better life than many who are still with their natural parents and so I don't get the problem. I don't see any psychological issues in these kids - it's not like adoption where you grow up with the thought ur parents didn't want you or it's an abusive household. They've had a great start in life and are very much loved and cared for. The baby is created to be born to these parents - it's nothing like selling another human being. They wouldn't exist if the surrogacy process hadn't happened

Can I ask how old are the children? Do they know their surrogate mother? Does each child know they are surrogate-born? How much did they pay her in terms of 'expenses'?

Nothing to do with us directly, so we should all ignore the issues and let those with vested interests set the policy.

Exactly.

Imagine if...

Women who haven't yet experienced the menopause were involved in improving awareness for employers around the biological process and how is hinders women at work

Women who have never had an abortion campaigned for access to safe and legal abortion

Women who were over the age of 30 drove Parliament to vote for women under the age of 30 to get the vote

Women who have never sold their body for sex campaigned for prostituted women to be rescued from the sex industry...

The position of liberal feminism to me can be summed up as "I'm alright Jackie" vs radical feminism which is "are you alright Jackie?".

They wouldn't exist if the surrogacy process hadn't happened

Yes. They would not have existed if they weren’t created in a planned and complex transaction for the purpose they were created for.

@OhHolyJesus 14 and 12. Yes they know they are surrogate children - no they don't have anything to do with the birth mother

I don't know how much they paid for expenses - I think the legal side of things was pretty expensive though

Absolutely spot on @PaleBlueMoonlight, I've bookmarked this because you've perfectly articulated my own views on why even "altruistic" surrogacy by willing women is not ok

Anecdata.

I'd also question whether you have any real idea about the quality of these children's attachments or self worth.

The psychologist my DD has because of the issues resulting from her removal from her birth parents would tell you that there are ALWAYS issues for these children. But even if it were 50%? 20%? What's acceptable to you so this trade in babies can be fuelled?

[quote flippertyop]@OhHolyJesus 14 and 12. Yes they know they are surrogate children - no they don't have anything to do with the birth mother[/quote]
And this in itself tells me that decisions made by the adults weren't made in the best interests of the children based on research which absolutely shows that ongoing contact results in better outcomes for children who can't live with their birth families.

Poor kids.

But they went to.private schools? All ok then

flippertyop It’s the US, so was commercial surrogacy. Coercive in that a woman (or women if a different woman’s eggs were also used) was paid.

Will the DC have access to the identity of their birth mother (and their genetic mother if eggs were donated)? If not, that’s a risk for them. There are also other risks, eg impact of separation from their birth mother.

100% @PaleBlueMoonlight that should be pasted into every thread on this

[quote flippertyop]@OhHolyJesus 14 and 12. Yes they know they are surrogate children - no they don't have anything to do with the birth mother[/quote]
Thanks for answering. Were they each created from the egg of the woman who is effectively raising them? Do you know how much was paid in 'expenses'?

Neither are old enough to have had their own children yet so I'd say it's a little early to tell if they've been effected or not, especially if they are not related to the commissioning mother. If either child is a girl and experiences pregnancy and childbirth herself they may feel differently about whether they are effected or not and as you said, you can't see any psychological issues, but the children themselves may feel differently. They may also be unable to speak about it, even to their parents.

@flippertyop

I don't know how much they paid for expenses - I think the legal side of things was pretty expensive though

So they were purchased and know they were bought but don't know who their mother/s are?

May I ask what country these examples come from, are they U.K.?

The fact is you don't know these children. They are not in any way poor children they are some of the luckiest children alive both emotionally and financially. I see you pick up on the private school but not the fact they have loving parents hi h I also mention. There are probably a million children in the U.K. born to shitty parents who can't or won't look after them. Save your sympathies for them not for the kids who are perfectly happy and have every available advantage given to them. In terms of health issues one is a donor egg one is the biological child of both parents. The donor egg child has full access to the medical history of the egg donor. Neither were the egg of the birth mother.

The position of liberal feminism to me can be summed up as "I'm alright Jackie" vs radical feminism which is "are you alright Jackie?".

Brilliant summing up @OhHolyJesus

One for my book of quotes.

What I really want to know is what's the downside or negative effect on the mother (since she's the one taking all the risks) if surrogacy is not allowed? I obviously expect answers from the posters that support it, but everyone is welcome.

No whatabouterries or analogies or how other things are bad too. Just one(at least) negative impact for a woman not being allowed to be a surrogate.

Now that could be a new Staniland question @ldontWanna

I await answers with interest.

flippertyop I also know a couple who have used a surrogate in the States. In fact, they used two different ones. Like your friends' children, they will no doubt have access to the very best of everything, such as holidays, schooling and a secure, stable home, and the children have been much loved and wanted. I don't deny that.

But as PPs have said before, we are yet, as a society, to really fully understand the emotional and mental health implications that will come with a group of people being part of that society, knowing that their mother was deliberately excluded from their parenting; indeed, she was never intended to be in it. I cannot imagine how complex it must be to process that an egg from another woman was used to impregnate a totally different woman, and that money in the six figures was used to erase both of these women from your life from the minute you were born, so that you could be taken to a different country altogether. As a result, you do not legally have a "mother". The whole thing seems so distant, so transactional, that I don't know what could ever compensate for that.

14 and 12 is, sadly, prime age for the complexities of these feelings to begin to emerge, but without the emotional maturity to deal with them. I sincerely hope it does not happen to your friends' children, or the children of the couple I know, but the point is what if it does happen to most or even just some children?

Moreover, I dispute the idea that just because it happens in the US, it is ethical for the women concerned. There is a company advertising donor egg harvesting from Ivy League graduates (I can't articulate just how uneasy that makes me) and while surrogates can't be on financial aid, considering the low bar for welfare in the USA, I can't see that as being evidence that the woman is financially secure and not compelled to do this in some way.