Surrogacy-help me explain to my daughter why this is exploiting women

[happydappy2]

Teen daughter thinks surrogacy is fine, as an opportunity for the woman to earn money.
I've explained that only impoverished women do it, not wealthy ones.
It's not fair on the child to be removed from it's natural Mother/protector.
It will be a high risk pregnancy for the surrogate.
Ultimately benefits mens, not women or children.
There have been cases of paedophiles commissioning surrogates
She just doesn't get it though-what else can I ask her to think about to get her to understand how exploitative this is?
I asked her, would it be ok for me to buy a 10 yr old child? No of course not, so why is it ok for wealthy people to buy babies?

She's nearly 18, I really need to help her critical thinking on this....thanks

I never said I was for it, did I?

You probably won't convince her - just let her hear your arguments, hear out hers and maybe she'll agree in time, maybe she won't.

Parents have responsibilities not rights. They have the responsibility to care for the child, to educate them, to house them etc. They are supposed to act in their best interest.
They cannot harm them or exploit them.

And to stick with extreme themes, here's an interview with a man whose wife died at the end of a surrogacy pregnancy.

If she's interested in reading a bit of medical stuff get her to look up the MBRRACE reports into maternal mortality, and get an idea of the risks of pregnancy and childbirth. Is it really acceptable to expose women to these risks? Of course we do it when we want a baby for ourselves but going through all that for someone else?

There is also MASIC Foundation (there's a thread in Mumsnet somewhere started by them) , take a look at their website, supporting women who had serious birth injuries. And of course you don't have to look far in Mumsnet to find a thread discussing the horrors of birth.

Or she could read some books.
Jennifer Lahl Broken Bonds has accounts from surrogate mothers. (I'm sure I didn't pay £16 for my copy - there must be cheaper ones available).

@happydappy2 do you mind explaining why this benefits men more than? Sorry I haven't thought about this topic much so I'm just curious

There are things it is and is not reasonable to pay for.

1. It is not reasonable to write a contract which strips a woman of parental rights before she even gets pregnant because she has no idea at the point where she signs the contract how she will feel after she gives birth. Any woman CAN give their baby up for adoption after birth if she wants or needs to, and with private adoptions you can choose who adopts the baby. The purpose of the contract is to force the woman to give up the baby when she no longer wants to. https://www.babycentre.co.uk/a1040656/how-love-blossoms-between-you-and-your-child

2. It is not reasonable to use another woman's egg rather than the woman who is going to carry and give birth (which dramatically increase the risks of death and complication) for no other reason than to strip the woman of options, rights, and power. Pre-eclampsia is a very serious condition and the risk is significantly elevated; eclamptic seizures can result in coma, brain damage, and possibly maternal or infant death.

https://evidence.nihr.ac.uk/alert/assisted-reproduction-using-donated-eggs-has-higher-risk-of-complications-for-mothers-and-babies/

3. It is not reasonable to have commercial surrogacy where the woman is paid to agree to sign such a contact as it puts women in coercive controlling relationships and vulnerable position in the despicable position of being forced, pressured and manipulated into doing it.

All of those things are main reasons I believe it to be fundamentally unfair and unreasonable to the mother (woman who carries and gives birth to the baby)

4. It also creates a demand for eggs (see point 2) and the marketing often quite unreasonably paints a picture of egg donation which suggests that it is equivalent to sperm donation in terms of risk and invasiveness, which is quite untrue. Long term health risks are quite simply unknown because no one has EVER studied them.

https://www.statnews.com/2017/01/28/egg-donors-risks/

Short term there is a risk of OHSS which can can severe symptoms

• Severe abdominal pain
• Severe, persistent nausea and vomiting
• Blood clots
• Shortness of breath
• Tight or enlarged abdomen
• Blood clots in large vessels, usually in the legs
• Kidney failure
• Twisting of an ovary (ovarian torsion)
• Rupture of a cyst in an ovary, which can lead to serious bleeding
• Breathing problems
• And, rarely, death

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/ovarian-hyperstimulation-syndrome-ohss/symptoms-causes/syc-20354697

And that we get to the baby...

1. no child should ever be deliberately conceived where plan a is to remove them from their mother at birth. We know this causes immense stress to the baby, at times it may be the lesser of two evils but it is an evil.

2. Some people buying babies have tried to force the mother to abort because they don't want the baby any more leaving a poor vulnerable woman to raise the baby without support.

3. Some people buying babies have just not turned to to collect the baby because they don't want the it any more leaving a poor vulnerable woman to raise the baby without support. Particularly with international surrogacy there is a huge power imbalance so the women are rarely in a position to force the people buying the baby to do anything they don't want to.

4. Babies are sometimes disabled, sometimes you don't know this until they're born. The people buying the baby often decide they don't want the baby anymore because the baby is disabled. Leaving a poor vulnerable woman to raise the disabled baby without support. (Literally left holding the baby)
   https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-28621639

5. Sometimes you know earlier & some people buying babies have tried to force the mother to abort the baby because it is disabled when she doesn't want to.
   https://nationalpost.com/news/it-wasnt-their-decision-to-play-god-surrogate-mother-flees-after-couple-demands-abortion-of-disabled-baby

6. and last but by no means least it's not ok to buy and sell people.
   At all.
   Not even a little bit.
   It's not ok to buy a person because they're a baby.
   It's not ok to buy a person because you're rich enough and can afford it.
   Because it's not ok to buy a person.

Id ask her what her views on Epstein island are, young girls trafficked, groomed etc. all viewed as party women at the time. As it’s a guarantee that there is a dark side where women and girls are being forcefully used for international surrogacy. When there’s a profit to be made then there is always a third party waiting to exploit.

Ask her why it isn’t OK to separate baby animals, such as puppies, calves or kittens from their mothers at birth, yet surrogacy says it’s fine to do it to a baby.

Ask her to imagine having a job where the employer (commissioning parents) have full control over your body and you cannot quit even if you are dying. There is no other job, even military, where this is the case. Where, if you develop a health condition, the employer has full control over the treatment and options.

Ask her why surrogates are always poorer women than the commissioning parents.

Ask her why we cannot sell our organs - even ones we don’t need like one kidney - yet we think it’s OK to buy an actual human baby.

Ask her how surrogacy is different from human trafficking.

@stillplentyofjunkinthetrunk I am strongly anti surrogacy but just wanted to point out you are wrong on the first point. In the uk the surrogate mother has parental responsibility after birth and this only changes when a parental order has been obtained by the people who have purchased the baby.

https://www.philosophersmag.com/essays/318-woman-as-resource-a-reply-to-catharine-mackinnon

Incidentally the Law Commission initially proposed a minimum age of 18 for surrogate mothers. Following their consultation they now suggest 21.

I took my 18 year old daughter to one of their public consultation events just after she finished her A levels. I raised the issue of the age 18, and was told it was the age of adulthood. I totally mortified the poor girl by pointing at her and saying "she's 18, just finished school, are you really saying it's acceptable to use her to breed a baby for someone who wants one?" There was a couple there, very unpleasant people, and the man leapt to his feet and literally spat the words "she's an adult, she can choose" at me, my poor DD shrank into her seat in horror.

She wrote in the consultation that whilst she was technically an adult she felt she still needed adult protection and that some young women could be manipulated or coerced into surrogacy when they should be protected.

I think that encounter really shocked her.

They don’t. Legally, in the UK, parents have responsibilities not rights. That’s a very fundamental part of our child protection legislation.

I think this is a really good topic to get her thinking critically (and then of course she may or may not agree with you). There are lots of comparisons being brought up here, which are a useful part of critical thinking. Another is the idea of theory vs practice - so would surrogacy be ok if xyz safeguards were in place, or is it right/wrong in any circumstance? Is it actually possible to put those safeguards in place? Is it ok to protect one person by limiting another? Etc.

I think it does depend on where the surrogacy agreement takes place. At the risk of being shouted down I think the U.K. is as ethical as it gets. You get basic expenses but no-one is doing it for the money, it is (or should be) more in the realms of genuine altruism. I ran into several fertility problems and am very grateful to have found two ladies who donated their eggs to me in the U.K. I don’t know who they are but I hope they did it for altruistic reasons and that the IVF clinic treated them well. My children will be able to get their details when they turn 18. There will be no secrets. I was thinking of being a surrogate myself as while my eggs are crap there’s nothing wrong with my womb. However I turned out to be pretty bad at getting pregnant through IVF and then I just got too old. Had I been younger and found getting pregnant through IVF easy I may well have sought out a UK surrogacy agency to match me up with a couple who couldn’t get have a baby in any other way. Perhaps a form of therapy to ‘return the favour’ that some unknown saint-like women out there donated their eggs to me and gave me & my husband the most precious gift it’s possible to have. And in terms of parting with the baby, I did think about that. I’d already had two stillbirths prior to ED so I know the devastation of leaving the hospital without a baby. By the same token I could never put another couple through that devastation and so I would never consider the child to be anyone’s but theirs. So to sum up, altruistic surrogacy is ok with me, commercial surrogacy no. And for those with concerns about the long-term impact on the children themselves, then I’m pro long-term studies following these children as they turn into adults (as I am with donor children, to be clear).

OP is she seeing this issue as being the exact same one as abortion rights? If so as an example of why it’s different: could your DD think about trauma and child development, and how newborn babies normally would be programmed to need to be with their mother the whole time, and vice versa?

To clarify, what I said was not in general intended as an accurate reflection of uk law, or a critique of current UK law. So when I said "It is not reasonable to write a contract which strips a woman of parental rights before she even gets pregnant"

That would be a position which is in alignment with current UK law, but is not the case in every country. It is also one of the reasons I oppose the liberalisation / modernising / relaxing of UK law (as this is being lobbied for as a change) in this area.

The impact of trauma and attachment on rupturing the mother/child relationship at birth is well known and well studied.

This is intentionally creating a child with the flat out intention of subjecting them to that trauma because an adult 'wants a baby'. It is creating a human being where fundamental damage to them is part of the plan.

The emotional problems and mental health struggles of adopted adults are well documented where those adults explain in depth growing up under pressure to be grateful, to exist to meet the adult need, and to not think of or speak of the birth parent that they are told is irrelevant, unimportant, flat out inconvenient in some cases: that is the child's genetic history there. In cases of adoption, this was the least worst option for the child; adoptive parents are told in training from the start 'this is no one's first choice: not yours and not the child's'. They are made very aware that the child is not a blank slate and the child is coming to them grieving, with losses. In this case, all these losses and harms are blown aside and not mentioned. Because an adult wanted a baby.

Adults using surrogacy are willing to take this risk with another human being - one they plan to love - in the hope that it will work out ok and their child turns out to be one of the lucky ones who didn't suffer trauma or long term distress and difficulties because they wanted, and they deserved it, and it wasn't fair that they couldn't have what someone else could. Some of those children will be ok. Some will not. Is this ok so long as the adults had the baby experience they wanted to have? They get what, a few years of the cute instagrammable bits and about two decades of the parenting experience before the person they created has another fifty plus years to live with themselves and any challenges.

It's the same argument as do we hand out puberty blockers and mastectomies to kids, because while some will have their lives destroyed, some will probably turn out happily.

And in adoption, parents are vetted very carefully as to their suitability to take on and care for a child who has suffered this rupture of attachment and loss. Commissioning parents are not vetted at all.

Ethics. Morals. Human trafficking. Children's rights. Commissioning, buying and selling human beings.

@mb2512cat you obviously went through some very traumatic times and it's good to read your happy outcome, so my comments are specific to points you make, rather than anything personal.

'Basic expenses ' for surrogacy are up to £15000 so there's definitely scope for making money. Sometimes donated eggs in the UK result from a 'deal' if you like , when women are having IVF. Spare eggs are donated in return for free treatment.

Altruism as far as surrogacy is concerned in itself can be a problematic concept because when does genuine selflessness become a feeling of 'ought'- be it 'helping out' a family member, with all the complex emotions that can bring, or just thinking it would be a kind thing to do for someone but not really having thought through the consequences, not least for the baby.

My late mum v much surprised me one day by saying that if egg donation had been around earlier she might have done it. I think she meant it too. But she had lost two children, one at birth and one at age three, and I think (though I never asked) the thought of creating new life would have given her a sense of hope. I do ponder that one from time to time.

I'm against surrogacy for all reasons already listed in the thread.
Egg donation to someone who carries, births and, crucially, raises the child (mother!) is less of an issue as long as the child is made aware of their origins and can choose to find out their genetic inheritance later, if they wish.

Start by asking which celebrity has been a surrogate for a poor couple and if she can't, maybe should should have a think about why.

Then move on to asking why there are a whole pile of long lost family shows on TV and why so many people feel the need to do DNA tests and what this might tell us.

Then move onto Irish forced adoptions and The Laundries and ask how that differs to baby farms in places around the world.

Then talk about emotional abuse and coercive control within families.

Ask her questions to force her to think and guide her if need be.

5 years ago I would have agreed with posters that surrogacy is bad. Full stop.

Then I met a woman who has been a surrogate - twice. And now I'm not so sure. I still have misgivings but there is more grey than my previous black and white view.

The woman I know, is intelligent & educated, employed, UK based. She has children of her own, a good family life. No money has changed hands and she's still in contact with both families - neither of whom could have their own children. She isn't related to either family.

I share the misgivings about the babies being taken from her at birth.
I have concerns that she has put her health at risk.

I feel challenged that I can see an alternative view.
Could I tell her that what she has done is wrong - no

Would I do it myself - hell no. Would I ask another woman to do this for me - never been in that position, so I don't really know, I want to say no never, but...

Does ‘helping her critical thinking’ allow for her to come to a different conclusion to you?

I think you have covered all the points about what is wrong with surrogacy, but this is not about her developing critical thinking but about you managing to convince her.

Critical thinking is about not just taking information from one source or when something doesn't add up, looking into more in depth.

Im not convinced that, in this country at least, it’s always about the exploitation of poverty. A lot of the women I’m seeing become surrogates seem to be huge attention seekers. In it purely for the glory.
Absolutely no altruism involved at all. Just pure showmanship.

I agree that this is a good topic to develop critical thinking skills, as there is genuine “good” and “harm” on both sides

if you switch the topic to organ donation then there’s an opportunity to delve into why most living organ donors are female even though recipients are slightly more male. Is there perhaps also (as well as the financial incentives that create pressure on people with lower income) a social pressure with the expectation for women to be caregivers and more compassionate?
it’s an interesting discussion.
it’s even more complex when we take international markets into account, and global power dynamics

however, I do concur with earlier posters. An exercise in critical thinking doesn’t necessarily mean she will change her mind and agree with you.

my friend has been a surrogate three times. She loves it, and genuinely wants to help people. Some people will know the same arguments as you and still disagree. Doesn’t mean their point of view isn’t as valid as yours.

Who's starting these conversations? If it's her, you need to ask her to leave this topic alone, as you both have different opinions and this is only going to cause arguments.

If you are the one bringing the subject up, you need to ask yourself: Would you like it if she kept on at you with the TWAW and genderwoo thing and kept ON AND ON trying to convert you to her opinion, and wouldn't let the subject drop? You've had your say. Change the subject and leave it alone.

So Im not in favour of surrogacy just to be clear

But surely the reason the surrogates you are seeing are doing it for the attention is the reason you are seeing them? And therefore it's quite conceivable that there are others doing it for other reasons, who don't want the attention and therefore naturally you don't hear about them (unless you work in a related field)

I would imagine an everyday women being a surrogate for her sister quietly doesn't make the press as much as someone who wants their 5 minutes of fame

Thay said it does raise a fair point about how its regulated if some of the women are doing it for fame or attention, as they aren't necessarily going to be people who will cope well when the attention goes away afterwards and thay could have a negative impact on their mental health.

Ok.

How would she feel about you carrying a child for her if her womb was not working?

And how would she feel about you carrying a child for her using her boyfriend's sperm if her womb was not working?

All cool?

Great!

Does she have a sister?

How would she feel about her sister carrying a child for her if her womb was not working. And then her sister died in childbirth?

Cool?

Would she accept sperms from her brother if her husband was infertile?

No?

Why?