Celebrity surrogacy - find this a bit heartbreaking

[Nowyouwillfeel]

Irish ‘celebrity’ couple with a new baby via surrogacy. The surrogate was one of the couples sister. They have put up pictures and stories all delighted and excited but I just see raw emotion on the mothers face in the second picture and in their stories the baby is clearly rooting for her mothers breast. I have a two month old who always does this and honestly it’s breaking my heart seeing the baby search like that while the dad doesn’t even notice and that she isn’t with her mother. They took the baby home before the mother was discharged and she is nowhere to be seen.

seems so unfair on both baby and the mother who doesn’t have any children of her own.

instagram.com/bprdowling?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=

What if you knew a gay couple that wanted a baby? What would you suggest to them?

Assuming you're talking about two gay men (because it's far easier for two women to have a baby, the male part in the process being fairly perfunctory) I would suggest to them that they should make their peace with the fact that two males can't have a baby without the involvement of at least one woman, probably two - one to provide the egg, one to gestate the baby. I'd also talk them through what's involved in both those processes, in detail, and point out the risks they are asking these women to undertake on their behalf. Then I'd explain that's why I believe it's unethical for anybody, whatever their sexuality, to 'use' a surrogate to carry a baby for them. I see it as a form of buying a baby, and I believe that's wrong. It's not good for the baby and the baby's needs should come first.

Becoming a parent is a great privilege. Not everybody gets to do it. Plenty of people have problems with fertility, don't meet the right person at the right time, can't have a child for health reasons, don't pass the (rightly) very rigorous screening to become adoptive parents - or look into adoption and make a realistic decision that it's not for them.

There's no escaping biology. I think it's entirely right and proper that gay men should be considered for adoption on equal terms with everyone else. However, having a child to whom one of the men has a biological tie is a different ball game.

If all else fails, I'd ask why human babies are treated so much worse than pedigree puppies or kittens, who can't be removed from their mother for several weeks after birth.

Depressing and grim. I see two men with their accessory. That poor baby. Wrong on so many levels. And yet, we’re supposed to cheer them on and see this as progress. Not a chance.

I think you are presuming social media shows the whole story. I am sure the mum is still involved but maybe does not want to be on social media right now.
One photo or even a lot of photos show nothing of the rest on their days .

That is not the point that was made in the post I responded to.

If you want to make a blanket argument against surrogacy, argue away. I disagree, but that's not the point. The point is that this, below, which has been trotted out numerous times on this thread in some form or another, is invalidated as a supporting argument when one supports women seeking IVF.

No-one is entitled to a baby
It is not an inalienable right to be a parent.
Sometimes, why not just accept your circumstances rather than demanding someone do something to meet your (selfish) wants?

I meant of the rest of their day outside of videos and photos.

Even with a donor egg her body created the baby, if she was ‘just’ a carrier she’d have given birth to a fertilised egg

I agree completely.

also, a surrogate mother who has never had a baby of her own (so first pregnancy) is extremely unusual, for a good reason.

What ever you think of surrogacy, I do think a lot of people are trying to read a hell of a lot (negatively) into these photos, especially regarding the sister who carried the baby.

Adoption isn’t that easy.

In most of Australia, where I live it’s early impossible. Two children that got adopted from father care made the new in my state, it’s that rare! Most children in care get put under Guardianship of the Minister orders until they turn 18 rather than adoption. It’s not anything like the same.

Not to mention that ‘just adopting’ can often mean taking on a traumatised child with major attachment issues.

I actually don’t agree with surrogacy in most circumstances but adoption is no easy option either.

I oppose all surrogacy in all circumstances. Those who defend it are defending a human breeding industry. "It's a woman's right to sell the use of her body" "It's a man's right to so called 'procreative liberty' to hire a woman to breed a child for him." This is what Gena Corea terms "Junk Liberty"

Surrogacy is reproductive prostitution, a crime against women, surrogacy is not liberty.

Ideas from liberal feminists are used for the benefit of men - the same old exploitation of women, for the use and benefit of men.

And the thing is, every woman who engages with this adds to the public perception of the normality of surrogacy and feeds the demand. Our own government states "The government supports surrogacy as part of a range of assisted conception options". This is another way of saying a woman's reproductive functions should be accessible to others. Of course once a woman's body becomes accessible it invokes demands for using her.

PPs who chime in with accusations of homophobia are handmaidens of the most misogynistic abuse of women, using them as walking wombs for rent.

And as regards inter-family surrogacy - a loving family member should not want to put their loved family member through the potential harms and risks of pregnancy and the trauma of giving up a baby. Although this isn't the first time a woman who has never had a baby before has been used in this way, I find it particularly shocking to make use of a woman who knows nothing of pregnancy and childbirth and how this fundamentally changes every woman who ever has a baby, body and mind - as some PPs have noted. I'm not aware of the details of the birth, why it ended up being a caesarian, maybe it was a planned LSCS, maybe she had failed forceps followed by a traumatic emergency LSCS. But she now has a caesarian scar. Subsequent pregnancies will be just that bit higher risk. I hope she doesn't want a big family of her own.

Aoife is gone to stay with her sisters for a few weeks. She's not with Brian, Arthur and the baby now. I didn't give it much thought until I saw the photo of Aoife, her face. She looks so sad.
They've apparently been making a documentary about it which will be interesting and controversial viewing. I'm curious as to weather Aoife will be involved in it after the birth. I feel for her. I can't imagine carrying a baby and having to hand her over.

I agree with everything said here.

Surrogacy is morally wrong. What people want doesn’t and shouldn't trump biological reality and the needs of women and children.

She obviously agreed to it, what’s the problem?
as long as the baby is well cared for. I couldn’t bf my baby . Same thing .

Agree with everything youve written! It should be banned. Some people are just entitled. I have heard of stories where women are forced into surrogacy for money. Should be stopped.

Could not agree more. It's people trafficking.

I always come back to what’s best for the baby? Staying with its mother.
Even puppies aren’t taken from their mother until they are 8+weeks and weaned FFS. Babies don’t need surrogacy - only adults want it - and this tells me everything.

Separating a baby from his/her mother at birth for anything other than lifesaving treatment is deliberately subjecting that baby to trauma.

That’s before we even think about the potential complications of pregnancy on mother and baby.

No one has a right to be a parent, not even rich gay men. Material reality isn’t homophobic; lesbians can have biological children but gay men just can’t. Sometimes life sucks.

@Nobetterthansheoughttobe can I ask where you say you appreciate that sometimes, nature denies us what we want, but often there is a reason why, what you think that reason is in the case of infertility people?

What is the reason a lot people cannot have children? Otherwise healthy people, people who have all of the capacity to love and raise a child, no other illnesses etc?

Gynaecologists can't even explain why in a lot of cases so I would love to know what you know?

If everyone has the right to a baby, then you have to go all the way to forcing women to be pregnant with the sole purpose of providing someone else with a baby. If you are not ok with that, then not everyone has the right to a baby. Sometimes things are black and white

^This 100%

I’ve not managed to read all of this thread yet so apologies if this has been mentioned but I’ve recently seen an American woman on TikTok who acted as a surrogate for a couple living on the other side of the world. She gave birth to twins who are now over a year old and the “intended parents” have not yet been to collect them and so they’re living with her and her family. They now intend to fight to keep the babies should the IP decide to show up and ask for the babies.

It seems to be a highly unusual case but just shows what can go wrong. I can’t imagine how unbelievably traumatic it would be for those babies to be moved away from the only mother they’ve known to live with strangers half way across the world. At the centre of this mess are two babies who have no idea that they could be uprooted from their home and family at any moment. Obviously this is rare but why should babies pay the price when it all goes wrong? All because of the whims of adults? Feels very wrong.

Not to mention that ‘just adopting’ can often mean taking on a traumatised child with major attachment issues.

absolutely. There is no ‘just’ about adopting, but at least adoptive parents are throughly vetted and then supported in the transition period.

Surrogacy is baby trafficking. Making babies to order with the intention of taking them from their mother at birth.

interestingly (and heart breakingly) babies born of surrogacy are growing up to have similar attachment issues and ‘genealogical bewilderment’ as most many adopted children face.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genealogical_bewilderment

The mother needs to go to court and get a court order so the babies can't be removed from her. The American laws are weird surely no court would allow the intended parents to rock up a year later and take the twins from the women who has looked after them.

She isn’t the mother.

Babies being treated like puppies doesn’t sit right with me. With so many children in foster care desperate for love there’s a chance for everyone to become parents without surrogacy.

I find it so fascinating that adoption is very often seen as an absolute last resort. Children are not taken from their birth families unless all other avenues have been exhausted, often when arguably they should be. Families can be neglectful and damaging but there is still an emphasis on keeping the child with the parent(s) wherever possible, because that is almost always seen as being in the child's best interests. The opposite applies in surrogacy cases.

To those asking why a couple who can't have biological children shouldn't be able to use a surrogate: because sometimes you can't get what you want. Life works that way.