Disappointed that Chimamanda Ngozie Adichie is promoting her use of surrogacy as compatible with feminism

[Carla786]

I loved Purple Hibiscus and recently got through the rest of her books from my library. I really like her novels and especially her GC stance, but I was discussing her on a feminist subreddit recently and her use of surrogacy came up. It's disappointing she promotes it here as compatible with feminism,

https://www.premiumtimesng.com/entertainment/naija-fashion/791804-ive-no-regrets-welcoming-my-twins-through-surrogacy-chimamanda-adichie.html

Infertility is of course extremely painful, but I don't think that justifies using another woman's womb.

Content warning.

A story about a man who is charged with pimping and sex trafficking, who has bought a baby via surrogacy.

https://reduxx.info/canada-local-pride-organization-founder-facing-sex-trafficking-charges/

I agree with everything you say other than the assumption that the poster is definitely a woman.

The same poster has also dropped in to warn users about the awfulness of misandry and the risks mothers pose to "lots" of babies on a thread about the sexual abuse and murder of a baby by his adopted father and his male partner. I knew which poster I was reading by the style of response without even looking at the name.

That's shocking.

@Forecastsayssnowbutthereisnosnow I didn’t reference that post as I wasn’t on it but I’ve seen the comments you are referring to and they’re just jaw dropping. Misandry certainly seems to be a real concern for that poster - mentioned on multiple threads - so you may well be right.

Back on topic for this thread, @ArabellaScott that story is shocking! Where’s the safeguarding for babies? A friend of mine has just adopted a young baby and the checks are rigorous. This is the concern re surrogacy - where do the rights of the baby figure? Or their safety?

Hm.

Speaking of adoption. Another content warning, I'm sorry. The news is horrible today.

A baby was allegedly abused and killed by his adoptive parent/s. Another strong content warning. Do avoid if you're not feeling strong.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c393eww1pero

I firmly believe that altruistic surrogacy provides cover and offers legitimacy to the horrors of commercial surrogacy.

ReduXX and Surrogacy Concern are two female-focussed orgs I follow on TwiX who document cases of sex offenders who buy children through surrogacy:
https://x.com/SurrogConcern/status/2046461426785550605?s=20

Alternate link:
https://nitter.net/SurrogConcern/status/2046461426785550605?s=20

This case is also shocking:
https://x.com/LiveAction/status/2046272690214801520?s=20

Non-TwiX link:
https://nitter.net/LiveAction/status/2046272690214801520?s=20

Re the alleged 'destruction of the family' in white British communities, it's worth noting that black British women are more likely to be single parents. (I understand you are black and referring to black communities in your paras on extended families?)
Maybe it's better to accept that there are strengths and weaknesses in families of all demographics rather than accuse any demographic of 'destroying the family'?

https://blackballad.co.uk/solo-parenting#:~:text=Black%20Women%20&%20Solo%20Parenting,are%20'lone%20parent%20families

I think the situation with your gay friend is surely different though? Presumably the lesbian he gave sperm to would be carrying her own egg, so she wouldn't be going to any more risk than a woman getting pregnant in a straight marriage would?
I respect his decision not to go through with it, but surely that's a different situation to a surrogate pregnancy where the woman is taking extra risk as she's carrying an egg that's not biologically related to her?

I suppose the difference with surrogacy is that the man is usually biologically related, and sometimes the woman (if her own eggs are used). But in this case arguably the biological egg/sperm connection is being weighed above the womb connection, to terrible consequences.

Moreover, arguably men don't have the same impetus to bond biologically often (I think) and this must be taken into account.

I find it odd that I could obtain a donated egg and mix it with my husband's sperm, carry that baby, and people say to me "yes of course you are the mother" ie the dna mother is not as important as the birth mother.

Meanwhile another woman could carry a baby for me, using my egg, mixed with my husband's sperm and people would say to me "yes of course you are the mother" ie the dna mother IS more important than the birth mother.

So, which is it? This is one of the crazy situations with reproductive technology. The child will be told whatever happened is the truth, and the "other" mother is practically written out in most cases.

Good point, exactly.

Bingo. People tell themselves whatever story validates their position.

A woman who uses a donor egg to conceive her child = she is 100% the mother.
A woman who used her egg for another woman to conceive her child = she is 100% the mother.

Both of these can’t be true. Spaghetti logic doesn’t work for children.

My friend isn't gay, his sister is. I wasn't saying it's the same as surrogacy, I was talking about family dynamics and pressure to help out a close and beloved family member. That pressure could be even higher because there is no health risk involved.

I'm sorry, I didn't follow properly. I understand what you are saying now : agree re pressure to help a family member & the dangers of this.

To be fair I’m against all forms of human trafficking. How is it ok to sell a newborn but not a four year old? Why is human trafficking of adults prohibited but allowed for newborns?

Yeah but maybe just debate surrogacy on a different thread? I am against surrogacy too but I think continuing this debate under this thread title is horrible. She lost her child.

Of course posters have the right to critique her viewpoints on whatever thread they like... but just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

You proposed you and the commissioning parents would spend weeks co parenting the baby. Presumably your existing dc would be part of this or at the very least aware. As they would be well aware that you had been pregnant and bonded with this baby who is physiologically part of you.

You then propose giving this baby away, for them to not loge with you and for you to not behave as a parent towards them. All in front of your child.

Your child would be very reasonable to wonder if they too can be traded and given away after a period of being co oare ted. That is destabilising.

I think to be so in denial as to the very significant upheaval this could have caused means you all had a very lucky escape in not taking this path.

Or consider that none of this story is real?

It’s literally the topic of the thread.

If this was happening at the same time a child was being fostered, and traumatised because of their life situation, I cannot imagine how such a decision would be made. Why would you risk that foster child’s life being further traumatised by taking a risk of an increased risk pregnancy?

But yes, explaining to a child that you have just been pregnant but you are giving away the child must have a destabilising impact.

It is not always paternalistic to disagree with actions a woman may take? It is not antifeminist to believe that women cannot just do whatever the hell they like come what may.

Surrogacy is not solely about the women choosing to be surrogate. It involves another human life. In the same way that saying women shouldn't murder people isn't anti feminist, or that they shouldn't sell their existing children isn't paternalisitic....

Doesn’t sit well with me (huge fan of Adichie, btw).

She also wasn’t infertile, it seems…she was old. There is a difference. She had a child naturally aged 38…then twins via surrogate at 46.

We don’t have a God given right to continue having children just because we want them in our 40s and beyond. To use a younger woman’s body to provide seems an awful route to go down…

I think at the point you are dictating what someone else does with their body, and in specific relation to women, with our fertility and reproductive organs, you should rethink if your position is just. Especially if you also consider yourself pro-choice on the basis of bodily autonomy

They don't see him as her child or her as their actual mother. I didnt realise that until it was pointed out elsewhere.

Feminism is the fight to liberate women as a class from oppression. When a woman's actions are incompatible with the liberation of women as a class, those actions are not feminist. Offering to create a baby and gift it to someone else is not feminist.

A society in which women and children are commodities is a society in which women and children are oppressed. Opposition to surrogacy is about telling commissioners that women's bodies are not for hire or loan and children are not for sale or gifting.