Nightshade,
is that the Lily Collins who is an actress? Isn't she a daughter of Phil Collins?
Here we are in an overpopulated world of about 9 million people, some folk like to promote more and more people to be in the world which will end many of Gods creations, IE the pope, thing is shouldn't he want to help what God created?
Lastly, I think if you can't have a child naturally, that adopting is more moral than getting a surrogate, because you are helping a child that already exists, not making a new one and potentially adding to the problem.
This was a couple of years back, but I read an article that in the US alone, there are over 400,000 children waiting to be adopted.
It's a horribly sad statistic.
And to that, whilst it's great (plus necessary!) for agencies to be thorough about who they might give a child to, let's try and cut some of the red tape for these potential parent(s).
People who conceive children naturally don't have to jump through hoops to prove they're fit to have a kid.
This is ridiculous. Using underprivileged women? Do you know how much surrogate mothers get paid? Something like $50-60K. All medical expenses, all psychological counseling paid for, and then an income the size of a luxury car. Sounds like the easiest pay day. Feminists fighting to make it illegal just make it harder for parents to have options for willing surrogates, and make those who do agree to use their bodies suffer lack of compensation. It's so backwards.
Btw, they've done studies, and the vast majority of people who helped bring another's child to life, report in surveys that they're satisfied with the experience and would consider doing it again. Studies find, most don't do it for the money but for the altruism of helping another family get the children they desire.
This was a couple of years back, but I read an article that in the US alone, there are over 400,000 children waiting to be adopted.
It's a horribly sad statistic.
And to that, whilst it's great (plus necessary!) for agencies to be thorough about who they might give a child to, let's try and cut some of the red tape for these potential parent(s).
People who conceive children naturally don't have to jump through hoops to prove they're fit to have a kid.
That's like saying XYZ number of people live in poverty, so how dare anybody spend money on anything other than poor people? Sorry, no more donations to causes you support. It's either poor people or nothing.
Nobody is under any obligation to adopt children, and there is an inherent value in having children who share your blood, your DNA. Some people are generous enough to adopt the children of another as their own, but not everybody has to be so generous.
All of life, after all, is nothing more than temporary vessels, organic machines built for the purpose of preserving and transmitting genetic code from one generation to the next.
Just like laying an egg!
Fill me up, ready for the next pay day! I'd make double that money in half the time at the mines, but they wont employ me, so lets get me hooked up and popping out those babies for a chance at quality of life! Simple ay.
hoponlilmamaThe potential for serious complications, permanent changes to your body, and death, "Ooh, this is a walk in the park!"
...they've done studies, and the vast majority of Studies find, most don't do it for the money but for the altruism of helping another family get the children they desire.
I have some moral qualms about surrogacy, but it seems hypocritical to criticize women for "outsourcing" pregnancy when 100% of men do so. They don't ever have to worry about "keep[ing] your figure, help[ing] your career, or because pregnancy is taxing."
NotASlayerNor do men get judged for not wanting children.
I have some moral qualms about surrogacy, but it seems hypocritical to criticize women for "outsourcing" pregnancy when 100% of men do so. They don't ever have to worry about "keep[ing] your figure, help[ing] your career, or because pregnancy is taxing."
Read the news at all? There's many people out there (we're talking those who conceive on their own) who don't deserve to be a parent. The point I was trying to make is that potential adoptive parents have to go through a gruelling process to get a child and there are others who don't need the adoptive route who aren't worthy.
I don't know what the requirements are to foster.
What's the solution to all those poor innocent children? That probably forms part of a larger discussion, which would get way off topic.
That's like saying XYZ number of people live in poverty, so how dare anybody spend money on anything other than poor people? Sorry, no more donations to causes you support. It's either poor people or nothing.
Not really. If this was a thread about endangered animals, and I threw out a stat like, "it's sad there's only 1000 rhinos left in the wild" that doesn't mean anything. It's just talking about facts.
An archaic notion, some might say. To pass on the 'family name'. At some point the person will pass on, so they're not there to witness the legacy. And if the kids they have decide not to have children - oops, end of the line for Mr. Smith!
Some people are generous enough to adopt the children of another as their own, but not everybody has to be so generous.
All of life, after all, is nothing more than temporary vessels, organic machines built for the purpose of preserving and transmitting genetic code from one generation to the next.
So if life is a temporary vessel and we're all passing through, why the emphasis on having your own kids? Aren't the lives of all children valuable and precious? Shouldn't matter if a kid isn't of your DNA.
This is ridiculous. Using underprivileged women? Do you know how much surrogate mothers get paid? Something like $50-60K. All medical expenses, all psychological counseling paid for, and then an income the size of a luxury car. Sounds like the easiest pay day. Feminists fighting to make it illegal just make it harder for parents to have options for willing surrogates, and make those who do agree to use their bodies suffer lack of compensation. It's so backwards
I think it's not like that in most countries. There's restrictions on what a surrogate can be paid, and even then, a lot will use women from other countries as its cheaper.
I wonder how many also will use surrogates from poorer countries and say they've either saved the child via adoption, or uplifted the birth mother out of poverty. When in reality they've done neither.
Instead, they were given hormones to stimulate their ovaries. Once a month the women were anaesthetised and their eggs collected, she said. Some of the women had not been paid at all.
I highly doubt it's always a million. This is just what came up from a google search but Surrogacy UK is saying the surrogate would get paid £10,000 to £15,000.
I am torn. the love of my life was adopted. He also had a very horrible childhood BECAUSE he never fit into the non blood family... he was a creative, emotional man in a family of plegmatic, imagination free, emotion free people... and by the time I met him, he was struggling hard... I wonder if he'd be alive today if he'd grown up with people who shared his blood and maybe 'got' him.
We planned to have 2 and adopt 2 but it never happened.
In truth, kids who are adopted often have bad outcomes for a variety of reasons...
Adopted children are disproportionately represented in criminality. It is sad but a bit scary. I think perspective adoptive parents know that they are playing a lottery AND Russian roulette... giving birth to one's own blood is just one of those... because we can't control anything really... but knowing our own blood and the blood of our partner does give us SOME idea of potential issues.
Adoptees are the LUCKY ones... loads of kids are never adopted.
Because parenting (and abandoning) does not require permission and it's funny how people condemn those who choose to parent DELIBERATELY (and are sometimes DESPERATE to have kids) and surrogacy is their only option. Not all people can carry a baby to term even if they can conceive.
Yes, i have issue with how surrogacy is practiced. Yes, i think women should be more than 'breeders' and should NOT be coerced or 'bought'. No, I don't think it should be made illegal. There will always be people who make hard choices because they have to and there are also people who would be delighted to have a child for someone who can't.
I think there should be checks and balances, but I think blanket condemnation doesn't really address a host of things that make having a child hard -- including the pressure women are under to delay childbearing for decades too long.
If people can freely have children and give them up for adoption or sometimes end up having the courts or child services remove them (my partner always felt ABANDONED) - I am sorry, but i won't judge people who feel a desire to have a family deliberately.
It is very easy to judge others. People give up children for good reasons. People employ surrogates for good reasons. I say live and let live.
Yes, it's lovely when people are willing to adopted someone's cast off child who might have been born addicted, or who might have fetal drug/alcohol syndrome. Some are, like my partner, wonderful people and I pray all of them have decent parents.
As for those adoptive parents, I salute them. Had my partner lived, I probably would have been one of those people. After his death, I wasn't in a position to adopt and I sadly never had any children.
I know why people don't want to deal with all the potential complications of adoption. I also understand why people want to have children who have their genes and/or who look like them. It doesn't make them racist or horrible.
This is ridiculous. Using underprivileged women? Do you know how much surrogate mothers get paid? Something like $50-60K. All medical expenses, all psychological counseling paid for, and then an income the size of a luxury car. Sounds like the easiest pay day.
Do you have any idea what pregnancy does to the body? The physical and emotional stress it takes, the danger it puts the woman in? Not to mention childbirth is still incredibly dangerous, painful and leaves the woman with lasting effects. Ten months of putting your body through hell is not what I would call "the easiest payday."
I'm sorry, but there is no "inherent value" that biological children have over adopted children and to state so is incredibly insulting to anyone who is part of a family they're not biologically related to,
An adopted chid becomes your child. They are not "children of another." This sort of thinking is why adoption is still looked down upon and it needs to be destroyed. Adoption isn't "generosity" (what an insult to the adopted child, "oh your parents were so generous to take you" ugh) it's simply a different way to bring a child into your life.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
