Why surrogacy should be banned

[DomesticatedZombie]

• article from Stefanie Bode.

'It’s always harmful. It harms our health, it exploits our bodies; it’s dependent on global inequalities and makes them worse; it violates our dignity, our physical integrity and many others of our human rights. It is a form of slavery (of women and children), and obviously it’s violence against women and children. It makes babies into commodities. It’s very cruel and inhumane to women and babies to separate a baby from its mother. '

www.filia.org.uk/latest-news/2022/2/8/why-surrogacy-should-be-banned

Funny you should mention that @OhHolyJesus
I have just been reading on twitter about the connection between the decline in adoption and the rise in surrogacy.

In particular this from Jennifer Lahl, in the USA.

"Agree decrease in adoption = increase in surrogacy. I attended a conference for AARTA.org (adoption attorneys). Nearly every presentation was how to move your law practice to surrogacy /3rd party conception and away from adoption law."

@FannyCann

The primal wound and the effect of separation of mother and baby on the child growing up is often mentioned. But imagine growing up and finding that your parents bought you cheap,y from an impoverished woman and left her to take her chances with war (or earthquake in the case of the Nepal babies). Imagine finding out just how heartless and irresponsible your parents were. Won't these children grow up and wonder what happened to their mothers?

Interesting you brought this up - not long ago I watched a documentary on a US baby selling operation from the 1950s to late 1960s. It was uncovered in 1998 but at least 200 babies were stolen from their mothers, told they had been stillborn OR induced early after convincing women who'd wanted abortions to wait until week 32. These children, called the Hicks Babies, based on the clinic were the crimes were committed, are now in their late 50s-early 70s and are trying to locate birth families/siblings using DNA. Many of the Hicks babies had birth weights of 3-5 pounds (average is more like 6-8)...these babies were sold to couples for about $1000 each, given to parents literally through the backdoor of the clinic with fake birth certificates with the adoptive parents listed as the biological parents...so wiping the birth parents completely from the record....NO real birth records were kept.

The documentary ALSO revealed a common theme from the now adult children of, "How could you BUY me?" One woman talked about how her mother noticed her 'adopted baby' was still covered in birth blood when handed to them and seemed terribly small. Some loved their adoptive parents and didn't want to blame them for being scammed, but one woman said her adoptive parents' behavior and willingness to do what was obviously not above board was "not love, but an act of desperation."

Adoption going down and surrogacy going up is probably a bit chicken and egg.

@ArabellaStrange

I was going to post in this thread. But the fact that there are posters on here Belle de Jouring an industry, which is in my eyes, even worse than prostitution, has left me feeling sickened within myself physically.

I feel this too.

I haven’t read all through this but it strikes me as quite sad when ‘feminists’ want to limit other women’s rights.

Comparing surrogacy to ‘Never Let Me Go’ is both to misunderstand the brilliant book (which I have read) and to want to outlaw therapeutic massage as some ‘massage’ parlours use trafficked women.

Yes, there are risks to surrogacy, and people could do it for nefarious reasons, but that is an argument for decent regulation, not banning it.

As some posters above have pointed out, it can be a win/win situation for all parties.

As a feminist, I have no problems limiting women's rights to buy and sell humans. I should hope no feminists would champion any unethical act just because it was done by a woman. If a woman is complicit in sex trafficking, she should be held accountable and go to jail and I do not think she has a right to engage in the business of procuring women and girls for sex.

Buying and selling people is wrong, and babies are people too. It doesn't matter if the people doing it are men or women; it's abhorrent.

As some posters above have pointed out, it can be a win/win situation for all parties

Through sheer dumb luck. And you can’t say it’s “win-win” until the child grows up and has not feelings of trauma about it all. What does “win-win” look like then? Let’s expand on it.

Luck to find a willing surrogate who is in no way impoverished and doing it out of coercion of circumstances. Luck that there were no side effects of medications given to aid implantation. Luck that the scans didn’t show a major abnormality. Luck that abortion didn’t need to be considered. Luck that miscarriage didn’t happen with all of the implications of that physically and emotionally. Luck there was no other serious complication in the mother. Luck the intended parents didn’t die in a car crash, or separate, or change their minds. Luck the birth went well with no complications to mother or baby. Luck that the baby was able to be taken from its mother without fuss. Luck the mother didn’t suffer major postnatal complications including PND or psychosis and death. Luck the mother didn’t suffer any long term health complications from having a baby for someone else.

And then 20-30 years later, luck that the child grows up without emotional concerns relating to the circumstances of their birth.

So now explain how you put in regulation to adequately protect all three parties equally in circumstances where that luck runs out? Because it has in cases known, and will in future cases. I’ve asked often of people to explain how they would come up with regulations to protect everyone and it can’t be done. One of the three parties involved has to give up rights.

Oh dear. Limiting a woman's right to be exploited. Objecting to the sale of babies. How very dare we. And calling ourselves feminist too. 🤷‍♀️

Is Filia a feminist organisation? Just asking because they carried this short article in their latest newsletter.

www.filia.org.uk/latest-news/2022/2/8/why-surrogacy-should-be-banned

Thanks for that @Delphinium20 Very interesting and shocking.

Apart from all the other horror aspects, inducing premature birth at 32 weeks in a time before NICU facilities existed when those babies would need special care. Truly shocking.

I will watch the documentary later, thank you.

This article says it's €88 a day for childcare for surrogate babies born in Ukraine to Irish parents and that there are only 14 babies due, not the 100 or so to one agency during the pandemic.

"The Irish parents of 14 babies due to be born to surrogates in Ukraine may face an €88-a-day fee for ‘nanny’ care in the under-threat country, if they cannot travel to the infants.
Around 14 babies are due to be born to surrogates between now and May in the Ukraine which is under threat of invasion by Russian military forces.
A small number of parents are understood to be in Ukraine, although most are still in Ireland.
Fine Gael Senator Mary Seery Kearney has been liaising with the parents.
Ms Seery Kearney, whose daughter was born via surrogacy, said she hoped the Irish State will assist parents with the cost they may face if the infants need to be cared for by surrogacy clinics following birth."

Financial support from government is being requested.

Prizes for those who spot concern for the surrogate mothers.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/irish-parents-of-babies-born-through-surrogacy-face-88-a-day-fee-for-nanny-care-if-they-cant-travel-to-ukraine-41343291.html

@TheReluctantPhoenix

I haven’t read all through this but it strikes me as quite sad when ‘feminists’ want to limit other women’s rights.

Comparing surrogacy to ‘Never Let Me Go’ is both to misunderstand the brilliant book (which I have read) and to want to outlaw therapeutic massage as some ‘massage’ parlours use trafficked women.

Yes, there are risks to surrogacy, and people could do it for nefarious reasons, but that is an argument for decent regulation, not banning it.

As some posters above have pointed out, it can be a win/win situation for all parties.

I know, we just shouldn't call ourselves feminists, being concerned for the rights, safety of women, even in other countries.

"Human traffickers have operated for long in the districts of Darjeeling, Jalpaiguri and Alipurduar in North Bengal, that share international borders with Nepal, Bhutan and Bangladesh, with Assam and Bihar nearby. But the business of trafficking young girls has acquired a new focus in recent years. They call it ‘bhade ki kokh’. And it feeds the relentless demand for babies from childless couples across India.

The eighteen year old girl who’d called anti-trafficking expert Amos Tsering said had run away from the house where she’d been confined by a couple whose baby she was carrying. The girl was not formally commissioned by the couple to be a surrogate; nor was there any agreement: She had, simply put, been sold."

https://theprint.in/india/bhade-ki-kokh-how-traffickers-from-north-bengal-earn-lakhs-from-illegal-surrogacy/830328/

I say women but really these females are girls. How about their rights? India closed its doors to commercial international surrogacy but prior to 2019, how many girls were trafficked as incubators for rich, white couples?

@OhHolyJesus,

Regulation (if enforceable ) would deal with everything you have highlighted just as well as a ban.

Realistically, there is little you, I , or anyone in the uk can do about human rights violations in outlying Indian areas (even Indian government has little real control in some of these areas) aside from virtue signalling.

All we can do is set a good example by regulating surrogacy in the UK well.

[quote OhHolyJesus]This article says it's €88 a day for childcare for surrogate babies born in Ukraine to Irish parents and that there are only 14 babies due, not the 100 or so to one agency during the pandemic.

"The Irish parents of 14 babies due to be born to surrogates in Ukraine may face an €88-a-day fee for ‘nanny’ care in the under-threat country, if they cannot travel to the infants.
Around 14 babies are due to be born to surrogates between now and May in the Ukraine which is under threat of invasion by Russian military forces.
A small number of parents are understood to be in Ukraine, although most are still in Ireland.
Fine Gael Senator Mary Seery Kearney has been liaising with the parents.
Ms Seery Kearney, whose daughter was born via surrogacy, said she hoped the Irish State will assist parents with the cost they may face if the infants need to be cared for by surrogacy clinics following birth."

Financial support from government is being requested.

Prizes for those who spot concern for the surrogate mothers.

[[https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/irish-parents-of-babies-born-through-surrogacy-face-88-a-day-fee-for-nanny-care-if-they-cant-travel-to-ukraine-41343291.html]][/quote]
That's 14 babies due shortly to Irish parents. It doesn't account for babies that are not due for a while or for those due to other nationalities.

The statement by Seery Kearney "To finally be pregnant by a surrogacy is a great moment but now for the babies to be born in the Ukraine at such a time is very distressing for parents" is shocking. It totally dehumanises the Ukranian women who are actually pregnant. It has definite shades of The Handmaid's Tale.

[quote TheReluctantPhoenix]@OhHolyJesus,

Regulation (if enforceable ) would deal with everything you have highlighted just as well as a ban.

Realistically, there is little you, I , or anyone in the uk can do about human rights violations in outlying Indian areas (even Indian government has little real control in some of these areas) aside from virtue signalling.

All we can do is set a good example by regulating surrogacy in the UK well.[/quote]
International surrogacy can absolutely be banned as evidenced by the Baby Gammy case with Thailand. It’s not like poor people in the peripheries of India are having surrogate babies for other poor people in the peripheries of India. Countries have banned surrogacy. If it was banned in the UK, who would complain? Rich people that they can’t buy a baby any more. Get out the world’s smallest violin .

So you think we can set a good example by regulating?

So how would you legislate for the multitude of clashes of rights I listed in my post above to set a good example?

And this is why surrogacy is confirmed to be successful for decades.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/7d5d45aa-8cf1-11ec-ab9b-59af3878ddff?shareToken=704789569810edc8231ac9c03ec6a6a7

Reissa Spier’s inquiries also exposed a deeper secret — she and the other adopted children were probably sold to people desperate to become parents at a time of lax laws governing the trade of babies.

This woman is in her 60s dealing with the genetics of her breast cancer diagnosis and found out she was sold as a baby.

It is me belief It should be banned. Babies and women are not commodities to be bought and sold.
However is there a risk of it going under the radar if it was banned Resulting in even more misery? In which case the answer would be much more stringent legislation in place to protect the surrogate mother and baby.

Claire Byrne on RTE Radio here in Ireland had a feature and interview with solicitor on the situation re babies about to be born in Ukraine and what the Irish government needs to do to "bring these babies home". Kept emphasising that they were vulnerable IRISH children, no mention at any stage of the women who have or who are about to give birth to them. And this solicitor wanting the 4 week period for the paperwork, procedures etc to be circumvented because no one could have forseen this. Except these arrangements were made in the midst of a global pandemic with women in a politically unstable country. The whole thing is enraging. As for looking for the government to stump up for the (miserly) 88 euro per day, I literally have no words.

@NotBadConsidering,

Asking an internet randomer to devise complex legislation is not realistic.

What really happens is all parties are consulted and a compromise is devised abs enacted into law by senior barristers.

I can’t do it. Doesn’t mean it cannot be done.

[quote TheReluctantPhoenix]@NotBadConsidering,

Asking an internet randomer to devise complex legislation is not realistic.

What really happens is all parties are consulted and a compromise is devised abs enacted into law by senior barristers.

I can’t do it. Doesn’t mean it cannot be done.[/quote]
You can’t do it because no one can. No one can do it without that word that you yourself used:

Compromise

But we are talking about things that should not be compromised on. If you don’t think you can come up with the minutiae of the legislation, just answer these questions if you can:

Should a pregnant woman compromise on who legally has the final say on what happens to her body?

Should intended parents compromise on the fact they may commission a surrogacy and the mother decide to keep the baby?

Should the baby compromise on knowing the circumstances of their birth, potentially their genetics, and the fourth trimester?

“Compromise” in this situation isn’t just deciding what to call the baby. It’s autonomy, major life decisions, life or death in some examples.

Irish and Ukrainian governments working together to expedite the collection of surrogate born babies - with this speedy exit will all normal and necessary checks be made or will they be waived?

Ukraine surrogacy agency, BioTecCom aren't known for making sure the right donor gametes have been used, will the right babies go to the right commissioning couples?

“In light of the current security situation in Ukraine and in consultation with other relevant departments, the DFA has temporarily made a number of revisions to the documentary process required to issue a travel document for children born through a surrogacy arrangement,” a spokeswoman for the department said in response to queries from The Irish Times."

www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/state-speeds-up-repatriation-process-for-irish-surrogate-babies-from-ukraine-1.4805664

This has annoyed me - can all families relate to this, given that the hugely different circumstances of the pregnancy and birth?

"‘Every parent in Ireland can put themselves in the situation..."Every parent in Ireland can put themselves into the situation to imagine if this was them, if this was their child and they couldn’t get them, how gut-wrenching and heart-wrenching that would be...These are Irish babies that are over there.” - Irish Families Through Surrogacy (IFTS) group, spokesperson Cathy Wheatley.

Can they? Do gametes determine your nationality or is it the nationality of your parents and the country of your birth?

www.independent.ie/news/every-parent-in-ireland-can-put-themselves-in-the-situation-surrogacy-group-on-families-awaiting-birth-of-children-in-ukraine-41345129.html

This tweet makes my point. It is a widely difference experience to be awaiting the labour of a woman you paid to have a baby for you, a woman who is in a country under threat of invasion compared to having the baby grow inside your own body where you have reliable, accessible medical care provided to you by the public purse.

twitter.com/msmerrythought/status/1494439912233443328?s=20&t=sqKIBhazPptjrHe92aZaDg

@OhHolyJesus wondered what the Times comments would say. The item was taken down fast, but in the period it was there, most comments were along the lines I suppose you and I and the majority here would post, condemning baby farming as they would puppy farming.
One comment was an American quote that when rich white women were being surrogates for poor black women, it might be believed it was 'free choice'

@Delphinium20

As a feminist, I have no problems limiting women's rights to buy and sell humans. I should hope no feminists would champion any unethical act just because it was done by a woman. If a woman is complicit in sex trafficking, she should be held accountable and go to jail and I do not think she has a right to engage in the business of procuring women and girls for sex.

Hear, hear.