Surrogacy harms women and babies

[collateral]

(100) What is a "Mother"? - by Lucy Leader (substack.com)

I reported my own post! Used an old link is all; my mistake!

Ooh MaterDei! I have learned a lot from your posts over the last few days what on earth were you deleted for on this topic?!

From the article

“Surrogacy commodifies not just babies, but women as well. “Rent a womb” services are not without peril for the women paid to produce babies for others. Women acting as surrogates are undertaking a high-risk emotional experience that can also turn into a high-risk physical experience. Please note the economic differences between “commissioning parents” and “gestational carriers”.
Particularly for a woman undergoing surrogacy with a donor egg, rather than her own egg, there are much higher risks for preterm birth, low birth weight, maternal gestational diabetes, gestational hypertension, pre-eclampsia and placenta previa. Even if high blood pressure and gestational diabetes abate after birth, women remain at a higher risk of developing these conditions in later life. Women who develop pre-eclampsia are at a higher risk of cardiovascular problems at a later point. And they take these problems into their next pregnancy, even if it’s with their own baby.”

I love this quote too

“A newborn baby has only three demands. They are warmth in the arms of its mother, food from her breasts, and security in the knowledge of her presence.
Breastfeeding satisfies all three.”

• Grantly Dich-Read •

Haha, that is lovely to 'hear' pomegranate! Thank you. 😊

I promise my post was deleted at my request - I didn't break any talk guidelines!

I posted (in haste) and want to look into the link further before posting it again!

I think the harms are becoming more apparent since Covid and Russia invaded Ukraine and we saw babies left uncollected in underground bunkers or a hotels or 'baby dens' without a primary carer.

The harms to women and children were always there but perhaps it wasn't quite as obvious as we have come to accept it as standard practice. Normalised by celebrities and the media narrative that women should be kind and it's all fine as long as everyone agrees (never showing the sad side or covering the legal cases when it goes wrong).

I've definitely noticed a shift but it's a matter of spreading the word. Nordic Model Now are helping with this as they have done a template letter to MPs (which can be amended with your own text) so you can write to your MP easily with your own thoughts and concerns about U.K. law reform on surrogacy.

nordicmodelnow.org/2023/04/01/ask-your-mp-to-say-no-to-commercial-style-surrogacy-in-the-uk/

Just seen this on twitter.
https://freebeacon.com/california/california-redefine-infertility/

California lawmakers are advancing a bill that would redefine the inability of men to get pregnant as "infertility" and entitle them to insurance-covered fertility treatments.

LGBT and fertility nonprofts backing the legislation have been clear about their agenda. They seek to decouple pregnancy from biological sex and traditional conceptions of gender and family. And the groups’ ambitions extend far beyond California, which is known as a testing ground for progressive policies of the future.

https://menhavingbabies.org/
This is an international organisation I hadn't heard of.

The international nonprofit Men Having Babies (MHB) is dedicated to providing gay men with educational and financial support to achieve parenthood through surrogacy. MHB’s annual conferences, workshops and webinars provide over two thousand attendees worldwide with unbiased guidance and access to a wide range of relevant service providers. The organization’s Gay Parenting Assistance Program (GPAP) annually provides hundreds of couples with over a million dollars worth of cash grants, discounts and free services from over seventy providers.

California lawmakers are advancing a bill that would redefine the inability of men to get pregnant as "infertility" and entitle them to insurance-covered fertility treatments.

Are they also passing a bill defining my inability to breathe underwater as a condition which will give me rights over other people's bodies?

Goodness, that's frightening? Legislating the rights of gay men to have babies means women have to support them... 🙄😰

This is one of those areas where I've changed my mind over the years as the harms and problems became more apparent to me.

This is another piece in the ongoing symphony "Women are public property which men have a right to use" and I am not here for it.