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

giving girls hormones to make them produce more eggs, then retrieve them can lead to them losing their fertility...it is far more dangerous than advertised, not comparable at all to a male donating sperm. There is so little research done into this but is is by no means safe....neither is surrogacy - having listened to the testimony of a husband who lost his wife after surrogacy, and a child who lost their Mother after trying to be a surrogate. Amniotic Fluid Embolism - more research is needed

I hope that never seeing her again wasn't too hard on you.

Lots of kids don't find out they're adopted until they are teens so I doubt being handed over at birth would have lasting damage.

Remarkable you could conclude the second part from the first part of your sentence.

@Helleofabore I didn't know there was increased risk. At the point I was discussing egg donors it was never mentioned and I assume thats the same. What are the increased risks?

On the doing it and risk leaving my child, isn't that what anyone who has more than one child does?

I know adopted people who are perfectly stable and well and they grew up with parents that are not biologically related. Also with the weight of knowing, for whatever reason, they were not wanted. Babies growing up with their biological parents, just grown in a different womb having issues... I don't see it. They will likely be adored children.

All that is said in the circumstances I spoke about, not the surrogates doing it for money and because they are pressured to, that is obviously exploitation.

Being adored children and suffering trauma from the circumstances of their birth are not mutually exclusive.

Is it worth asking her to weigh up the harms and benefits?

We know that removing a baby from it's mother causes the baby immediate distress and a degree of ongoing harm that can last into adulthood. In a conventional adoption situation, we can balance that harm against the benefit to the baby of not living with parents who are unable to care for it. We recognise the harm caused, try and minimise it, but accept that this is the least bad outcome in the long run.

In surrogacy, we choose to inflict that same harm on a baby. The baby doesn't know why it's lost it's mum, after all.

The only balancing benefits are:

1. financial gain for the mother. (And, yes, I agree with you on this being an exploitative relationship, but she doesn't. So table it as a benefit because, in her mind, it is.)
2. allowing an otherwise childless individual/couple to have a child
3. financial gain to everyone employed in the industry

So maybe some questions to get her thinking might be:

Are there other situations where we decide, in advance, to cause harm to one individual solely to benefit others?

Do the ethics of that balancing act change when the person being harmed is unable to consent? So is altruistic kidney donation different, because the donor understands and consents to the surgery?

Does the good done justify the harm to the baby in this case?

Is she conidering it as a career option?

Carrying a child that is not related to you has increased risks to the woman carrying that child. You can go and look it up. Higher risk of pre-eclampsia and haemorrage to the mother carrying that child has been found for egg donated pregnancies. As well as the risks that IVF pregnancies carry both to the mother and to the child.

So, no one ever discussed the higher risk to you?

And do you understand the risk to the egg donors of donating eggs? Even healthy and fit women? The risk of stroke, the risk of their own future fertility? It is easy enough to find the stories of what has been happening to the young women from the USA who have been donating to eggs.

“On the doing it and risk leaving my child, isn't that what anyone who has more than one child does?”

So a surrogate who dies or is left incapable of caring for their own children is an acceptable outcome to you because parents choose high risk pregnancies to have their own additional children?

Do you understand the concept of exploitation of women for their fertility? Do you really find it acceptable that a woman goes through a high risk pregnancy or egg donation cycle just to provide a person a child on demand? That they could die or become severely impaired to provide someone a child on demand is ok, why?

Have you understood the different factors that relate to exploitation even of ‘altruistic’ surrogacy? The family or friend pressure that may or may not be coercive, but is still there. Or the motivation of a woman who has a need for that feeling of being pregnant, or who needs to feel needed by their friend or family.

How in-depth are the interviews to assess the reality of the woman’s decision? She may not even be aware of the abusive family dynamic that led to her choice because she has never recognised it or been able to articulate it.

No. Hand waving the risks of pregnancies away with ‘it is just like a couple choosing to have more children’ is using the wrong comparator. They choose to because it is their own risk to take and to assess to add to their own family.

They are not getting pregnant and then handing that resultant child over to someone else deliberately, thus putting their own family unit at risk.

Just as adopted children are not the correct comparator for outcomes either. Adopted children have generally not been created specifically as a transaction. They were hopefully never conceived to be transacted.

Surrogacy born children are commodities. They have been transacted, even though they may be very loved and wanted, and they have to deal with that knowledge. That at least one woman’s body was exploited for that human to be created on demand for at least one person who effectively purchased that created human being. There is absolutely no way to present this that hides this reality.

An adopted child is generally left in a position of having to be adopted because its mother was no longer able to look after them. For a huge number of reasons. Adoption is generally a solution for a child who is already born or about to be born. However, there is, of course, situations where a child created on demand by a commissioning parent has to be adopted by someone else. For instance, if that commissioning parent decides they no longer want that child and walks away from the agreement.

Being wanted and loved has been proven already to not be enough to deal with the emotional toll of being created on demand for someone else’s desire of having a child created just for them. Of being effectively reduced to a commodity by the people who are meant to love you the most. There are already adult children of these procedures speaking out about their needs. About the legacy they now have that they find difficult to deal with. That of being deliberately created on demand like a product to fulfill someone’s perceived need. Their voices are already out there and are growing.

I think if you speak to adopted children as adults there are many additional complex issues they have to deal with emotionally around their adoption. But their situation is not equivalent as they are not likely to have been created on demand.

Pregnancy is risky. Fortunately in developed countries most women end up with a bit of extra weight and a few stretch marks, but even here 1 in 1000 pregnancies result in a woman having a cardiomyopathy, that means they might need a heart transplant and will have a shorter life.

If a woman can make the same amount of money with the same qualifications would she choose to be a surrogate?

What is the impact on the child as they get older? What if they want to meet their birth mother?

What happens if the child is disabled? If the disability is found in early pregnancy who decides whether the the pregnancy is terminated? If the disability is found at or after birth what happens to the child? Do the people paying want their money back? Do they want the baby or are they going to reject it? Look up, 'baby Gammy' who is living in Thailand with DS while his twin sister is in Australia.

What checks are made on the parents buying the baby? Would they be accepted as adoptive parents?

Is it acceptable to 'own' a human? If it isn't then why is it OK to buy a baby?

I know adopted people who are perfectly stable and well and they grew up with parents that are not biologically related.

And some are not, and some are deeply angry, resentful and unhappy with emotional harm that they have spent their adult lives trying to recover from. A bit of reading around and listening to those voices will show you that this 'it's all fine and lovely and they were loved' narrative is part of what they have found most damaging. And those were children in local authority care where adoption was the best of the options available to them.

Someone choosing to do this to a child is shrugging, saying they might be ok or they might suffer a lifetime of misery and damage, but I want a baby so I'm ok with taking this risk with them. And doing to them intentionally what an adopted child has suffered through a disastrous situation that was no one's first choice.

Also with the weight of knowing, for whatever reason, they were not wanted. Babies growing up with their biological parents, just grown in a different womb having issues... I don't see it. They will likely be adored children.

Again, read the words of adopted adults. Who were adored. Love doesn't undo trauma or attachment difficulties. Being adored doesn't cancel out damage. Or the anger and bitterness of having been used to meet the needs of adults who weren't interested in your perspective or experience if it conflicted with what they needed to get out of it.

Yes Frood.

In my experience, even those children who know they are loved deeply but were adopted, can have significant trauma . And in the cases I know, it hasn’t mattered whether it was known they were adopted as a young child, or told later. Or whether they were adopted as a baby or as a toddler.

It is almost cruel the way some people dismiss this trauma.

Sometimes that cruelty is a response to their own pain. Sometimes it is because they have no experience of it or have not read about it. But sometimes people will dismiss the impact on the child because that person desperately wants a child and cannot accept that their child is in pain. If it is because of the adoption, it is likely a trauma from the reasons why the child needed adoption and not necessarily caused by that adoptive family. But it seems to be there all too often.

But imagine being in a situation of being told that the child you had created and exploited at least one other woman’s body to bring into the world may need significant mental health support to process and cope with your choice.

No wonder the stories directly from the now adult children are overwhelmed by the voices of those benefitting from those assisted conception situations. But each year the numbers of those brave enough to speak out are growing.

@Helleofabore

I never said I agree with the exploitation of women to be surrogates. I don't, it's awful that happens. Like anything good in this world, it can be exploited.

However, if a women is happy (for whatever her reasons are) to carry a baby on behalf of someone else, I don't think that's wrong. I think that's amazing.

If there's no money involved it's not a transaction.

Any woman going through IVF would have to go through the egg retrieval process regardless.

I don't disagree with the OP, her daughter should understand how awful some of the examples of surrogacy are. But it can also be a wonderful selfless thing.

@Froodwithatowel I totally accept I don't know enough about the long term effects of adoption, just the people I know. I'm sure there's good and bad examples of outcome. I can't imagine how it must feel for kids old enough to know what's going on. It's questionable how much worse things would have been for them if they weren't adopted though...

My point was that babies born through surrogacy (not through any exploitation) are the most wanted babies on the planet, and biologically related to their parents. I might be odd but I just can't see how it would cause any serious issues for the child.

I shall reask the question about the use of the word exploit.

ANY surrogacy is exploiting at least one woman for their fertility. Whether that is perceived as being a voluntary action or not. And I would suggest that the truth about altruist surrogacy is that it is very rare. Very rare. Because human family relationships and friendships are very complicated. Coercion may be all too often not understood.

Your ideal of this wonderful ‘selfless’ thing is perhaps motivated by your own need to believe that it is not exploitative. But it is. It most certainly is. Because any surrogacy or donor conception is exploiting others. Whether you like that negative connotation or not.

And it most definitely is a transaction. Just because it is not necessarily a financially beneficial transaction, it is a transaction.

You really also seem to have a naive understanding of surrogacy too if you chose to insist that all children born today surrogacy, even altruistic surrogacy, are “ are the most wanted babies on the planet, and biologically related to their parents.”

You can believe whatever you wish. But if you do believe this, please stop denying the harm that occurs to women and the children involved in your need to continue to believe that this is not exploitation of at least one woman and a transaction regardless of how the story is spun of this ‘ideal’.

And I really recommend that you read beyond the lovely curated stories spread by heavily invested charities and organisations. Read the stories from woman who have nearly died or who have died doing this for their siblings or friends. There are plenty already who completely disagree with your ideal and every single week they are growing.

“Just because it is not necessarily a financially beneficial transaction, it is a transaction.”

Should be

Just because it is not necessarily a financially beneficial transaction, doesn’t mean it is not a transaction. it is a transaction.

I expect most 18 year olds are pretty clueless about just how difficult pregnancy and childbirth are. They might have heard of morning sickness, and will be aware that childbirth is painful, but gow much do they REALLY know?

Do they know that 90% of women tear in vaginal childbirth? That sometimes their clit can end up being torn in half without pain relief? That women tear all through to their bum? That some women have to have surgery to repair the damage childbirth does? That the alternative os surgery, but being awake for it? That some women have permanent damage from pregnancy/childbirth?

Does she realise the hormonal and biological urge to care for your child once it's born? How distressing it can be for mum and baby to be apart?

I'm sorry saying to terrify her by necessarily telling her this, but she probably doesn't 'get' quite what a big deal surrogacy is.

@Helleofabore im sorry but I totally disagree. A woman making a choice on what she can and can't do with her body is not exploitation.

If I were 10 years younger I'd do it in a heartbeat. If I thought it wouldn't be a waste of good eggs I'd do it now.

Everyone has different experiences in life, and unless you've experienced infertility you won't know the pain and trauma that comes with it.

So if I could do that for a woman that might never have her own child otherwise, I would. Zero exploitation involved.

Women doing it in the likes of Ukraine is a totally different story and not one I agree with at all.

Why would you do it?

Tell us exactly why you would do this? And would you do it knowing the risk if you already had children of your own?

A woman making a choice on what she can and can't do with her body is not exploitation.

But you're speaking about choice as though it exists in a vacuum. But it doesn't. There's a reason the buyers are rich and the sellers are poor and it's never the other way around, that rich women (with actual, real choices) never choose to incubate babies for anyone. Given a real choice, only a vanishing minority of women would ever choose this.

@Babynumberone369 I think that's amazing... a wonderful selfless thing.

I think you bring up an interesting point and a widespread perception. I guess as I've grown older and seen more things and crucially (for me at least) had a daughter of my own I have come to see

a) women are groomed from birth to understand being selfless as a virtue. A good and beautiful thing. We are trained in the expectation that we should put others ahead of ourselves, even to the point of harming our own interests and risking our own safety.

b) Being pregnant messes with your head, wanting to be pregnant / get pregnant again is an evolutionary driven imperative. The payoff for this of course is supposed to be that you procreate and have another kid in the world.

Benevolent surrogacy hijacks / utilises a combination of these two instinct in another so that other people can have a baby. I do understand and accept the instinct (particularly when the child would be your niece / nephew for example) but that a woman is prepared to do it is not necessarily evidence (for me) that it's fine. Probably where I sit is certain things must be legally prohibited, other things probably legally permissible even if I consider them exploitative.

E.g. you reference women undergoing IVF choosing to donate surplus eggs to other couples, this would for me fall into 'should be legally permissible'. Financial reward or incentive to do so should (for me) be blocked by legislation.

@Helleofabore
I would do it because I know how completely empty and pointless I felt when I was told I'd never be a mum.

It's hard to make any significant mark on the world, so if I could give that gift to someone else in that situation, then I would.

And yes even with my child I have now I would, every mum having another child does, albeit less risky. Leaving the house and driving is risky, you can't live life like that.

So knowing now that surrogacy pregnancies are higher risk than a naturally conceived pregnancy, you would do this even if you have your own children.

I think your post is very clear. As is your dismissal of the negative aspects of even altruistic surrogacy.

Bluntly, you have a need that being a surrogate would fulfil, I am sure you will never see that need but it is clear in reading your posts. You would choose to leave your own children without a mother to fulfil it.

@Helleofabore

You clearly have never suffered with infertility. Only make such grandious assumptions on things you know all about.

My views are my views, you can disagree but you are wrong to pass judgement.

I just can't see how it would cause any serious issues for the child.

It really won't take a lot of effort to inform yourself, plenty of information around.

A friend of mine adopted a newborn at birth in the US, one of the situations where the mother chooses the adoptive parents before birth. A perfectly normal pregnancy, mother was well and healthy, just not in a situation where she was able to parent, and the baby went to the adoptive mother's arms the second he was born. He went to a happy family who were longing to parent him and he's been adored. He's now mid teens and his severe attachment difficulties from birth have ended his parents' marriage, he's been through multiple schools struggling to meet his needs, when distressed he is violent and dangerous and his siblings and parents have been injured. He was supposed to be fine with the rupture from his birth mother because he was going to a lovely adoptive family who were longing to parent him. He wasn't.

You know nothing about me and what I have and have not experienced. Nor any of my loved ones.

I do pass judgement on someone who denies the harms to women and children on a feminism board. Whatever their background.

You wish to deny that any surrogacy is exploitation because you don’t like that word. You also deny the transaction that takes place because the word is also negative in your view. These are realities of surrogacy.

You can choose to deny them. I don’t.

@Babynumberone369 As a fellow infertility sufferer and eventual mum via ivf, I think it’s really interesting that you’re approaching the whole situation from the wants of potential parents - all your posts are about ‘helping someone become a mother’ rather than what is best for the potential child.

I thank my lucky stars every day that I have my DD, after 6 years of gruelling ivf treatment. I used to be neutral about surrogacy (never considered it as an option for us but had no issue with other doing it) but the SECOND they took my newborn DD out of her incubator on the neonatal ward and put her on my chest, she stopped crying, settled down and snuggled in. It was like magic, she knew me, my smell, my voice. It was like she was part of me, and it absolutely killed me that I couldn’t have her with me in my room and instead had to hobble down to visit her in the nicu. It felt like I’d had a limb cut off.

The thought of deliberately creating a baby only to immediately take them away from that source of comfort just feels wrong to me, and I’ve been anti surrogacy ever since.