The first step towards an international instrument to abolish surrogacy.

[TheywontletmehavethenameIwant]

"A group of states at the United Nations has launched a political declaration calling for an international moratorium on surrogacy, marking a significant first step in what its supporters hope will become a global abolitionist framework."

UN States Launch Political Declaration for Global Surrogacy Moratorium ━ The European Conservative

"That is a long road. But for those who oppose the buying and selling of babies and the exploitation of women, the fact that states have now placed the issue formally on the UN track is already the point: the market is global, and the response is beginning to become global, too."

I not sure I have any faith in the UN anymore, but hopefully this will gain some traction, I can see it clashing with the Global Left's Utopian ideals though.

Quite a few in countries that are more religious than our own and have open adoption

Lexible do you actually live in the real world? Damaged unwell or drug addicted women don’t sometimes make good choices and when they have a baby they can’t care for someone has to. It’s suboptimal. Adoption is “making the best of a bad job”.

Surrogacy is choosing to bring about this situation for the benefit of the commissioning parent. The two are not the same.

I remember how at the outbreak of Russia’s war on Ukraine, just after Russia invaded, there were surrogate babies waiting to be collected who hadn’t been.

I wonder what happens in some places where the baby is born with special needs and becomes unwanted?

Sure campaign for that if you want. I am not shocked by your suggestion as I'm not religious and live in a country where it has been possible to obtain an abortion for some time.

I doubt the majority of mothers who end up with their children taken into adoption planned for it to be like this however.

If you genuinely care about the fate of adopted children the best you could actually do would be to concentrate on childhood poverty and adverse experience, relationship education, the cost of living etc.

We're talking about two distinct forms of child abuse here and this thread is about a form of child abuse commited by wealthy people. The methods for ending this abuse are going to be very different, so whilst it's great to see more people understanding more about childhood attachment and abuse, there's not an awful lot of mileage to be had to keep focusing on adoption on this thread, close to my heart though the topic may be.

But why do they choose to get pregnant in the first place if they are intending to give up the child when it's born? Are you really talking about a type of surrogacy arrangement?

One aspect of surrogacy that is rarely discussed is the impact of infant/mother separation on feeding and long term health. Very few surrogates pump milk for the baby they’ve gestated, and it’s known that being pregnant but not breastfeeding/lactating is an increased risk factor for breast cancer and a few other maternal health issues, plus, there are various increases in risk for babies that are artificially fed. Is it ethically sound to deliberately create a baby that is not going to get any breastmilk, or to increase the surrogates risk of breast cancer, diabetes, ovarian & womb/endometrial cancer, osteoporosis?

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2812877/

This.

Explained in two simple sentences.

Because the cost to men is a wank.
The cost to women is pregnancy and birth.
The two are not remotely comparable.
The risks and investment in creating a baby are completely asymmetrical in males vs females.

https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15975121/Surrogate-sued-abortion-Canada.html

Why is it always Canada, I have no sympathy for the adult's involved, all of my sympathy is for the poor child.

Lets hope they make surrogacy illegal all over the world, so no more children can be created by misfit, dead loss, waste of space human beings.

Since the advent of publicity for formal surrogacy, the focus has always been on the benefits to infertile couples, always the emphasis on what adults want. Now surrogacy has been considerably normalised, there is further pressure to not prevent 'non-traditional' would-be parents, such as male couples, from fulfilling themselves, pulling in 'progressive' support.

This diverts attention from the commercial nature of global surrogacy and the promotion of it as a lifestyle choice in the capitalist model of supply and demand. Companies - sorry, agencies - wanting to supply are commissioning babies from poorer fertile women for a clientele which is wealthier. Agencies attempt to tie up these deals legally so natural mothers can't re-claim the infants, sometimes using bio-tech like egg / womb separation across surrogates to muddy the legal issue of biological motherhood.

Bringing children into being within this structure is emotively defended from the point-of-view of the adults involved. It isn't comparable to adoption, in which a need is met for an existing child (although there are parallels in the historic removal and adoption of the babies of single girls, servicing the demand from 'respectable' married couples). Adoption is regulated and monitored in many nations in ways that surrogacy is not. It is a trade, however the language is finessed.

The child should always come first, and then the birth mother. With surrogacy the resulting parents come first, which is how adoption used to be. The adoptive parents came first, they were being made parents, sod whether it was better for the child or the birth mother.

Luckily it was recognised this was wrong and now adoption should always be for the best interests of the child. In this country, at least, it is also recognised that anonymous sperm and egg donation is harmful for the resultant child. Even now it is not anonymous it can still cause issues with children and needs to be carefully handled

Surrogacy is at the bottom of the pile here. The law needs to be changed

So interesting the point about surrogacy being more similar to the horrific taking away of babies from single mothers to give them to infertile “respectable” couples. We are encouraged to tut and be outraged about this happening in the past whilst the “right on” left are ushering in surrogacy. Insane.