Feminism and Surrogacy

[nightshade]

This article appeared for me the other day, and while it's rather thin on details it has made me curious.

Society cannot ignore surrogacy | Helen Gibson | The Critic Magazine

Monitoring cases of surrogacy, surrogacy agencies, and accounts which promote the practice, I am used to seeing shocking images every day. Women are referred to as “gestational carriers”; surrogate mothers refer to themselves as “microwaves”, “ovens” and “extreme babysitters”. Notable for their absence is usually any mention of the rights and needs of children, to say nothing of the societal implications for all women if surrogacy can become to be seen as something you can just ask a woman in your social circle to do for you.

Along with other campaigners, I have known for a while of several cases where grooming of the surrogate mother, and downright coercion, came into play in inducing the woman to carry a child for another couple. These instances are in the UK, where we supposedly have an “altruistic” model of surrogacy.

Of course once you get one article you get more: Pope Francis calls for universal ban on practice of surrogacy

What are your thoughts? Im not talking about what's legal or illegal in your country but what do you think on the topic of surrogacy?

When I was younger I thought it would be a easy thing to do, get pregnant and give someone a baby. However now I can't imagine how someone could go through that, especially for a stranger.

(I will close this if it gets political or too heated)

 

[November]

Yeah its dangerously close to buying babies and using underprivileged women as incubators for cash. Bad road, but we're already halfway down it.

 

[nightshade]

Yeah its dangerously close to buying babies and using underprivileged women as incubators for cash. Bad road, but we're already halfway down it.

Pretty sure it's already there, Georgia has now banned international surrogacy, to stop it being big business: Surrogacy in Georgia to be allowed only for citizens, says PM

Which makes it harder to understand the many celebrities that do it.

 

[Joan the Vampire Slayer]

What are your thoughts? Im not talking about what's legal or illegal in your country but what do you think on the topic of surrogacy?

My thoughts are...complicated, I guess? One one hand, I am all about body autonomy, and believe very strongly that everyone should be able to do what they want with their body, as long as it's not hurting someone else. If a woman agrees to be a surrogate for a couple, and she gets compensated for it, that's no different really than doing any other service. That said, this only applies if she is not being coerced or manipulated into it. It can be a Godsend for gay couples especially, who want their own biological child.

Would I do it? Get or be a surrogate? No. But I am also childfree so perhaps my opinion doesn't really matter.

Surrogacy is becoming a lot more common these days, and I don't think it going anywhere. I'm guessing due to the increase in infertility.

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.

 

[Bop]

What are your thoughts? Im not talking about what's legal or illegal in your country but what do you think on the topic of surrogacy?

I think it shouldn't be taken lightly because being pregnant and giving birth can lead to health complications or death, so paying for someone to take that risk can easily be morally wrong. Especially because some rich women will pay a surrogate to carry their child just because they don't want to get fat or take those health risks themselves. But if a couple is unable to have their own biological child turning to a surrogate is more understandable.

 

[nightshade]

I think it shouldn't be taken lightly because being pregnant and giving birth can lead to health complications or death, so paying for someone to take that risk can easily be morally wrong. Especially because some rich women will pay a surrogate to carry their child just because they don't want to get fat or take those health risks themselves. But if a couple is unable to have their own biological child turning to a surrogate is more understandable.

I think there's a big difference between carrying a child for an infertile family member, and paying a poorer woman to carry your child because you don't want to take on the health risks or change your own body to carry one.
The mental health of the woman carrying the child should be considered, as she must have bonded with that child while pregnant.

 

[November]

Pretty sure it's already there

Its been in the media a lot here this year. It is legal here but illegal to pay for it. The birth parent still has most rights when it comes to the child needing permissions and healthcare until the years of paperwork is finished.

So people hire wombs from overseas (mostly India) instead.

There was a couple on a popular parenting tv show last year with 4 nine year old boys - two sets of twins born on the same day to seperate mothers now adopted by Australian Dads, taken away from all of their birth culture and customs raised by older wealthy men.

Godsend for gay couples

Thats a funny word to use 🤣



Would I do it? For $1 million, absolutely! And that is the problem with it. There is someone's willing to do it for less.

It would set me up with a quality of life on par with my peers. Grief of losing a person is not like mental illness in my opinion. Grief happens to everyone in life. Long term poverty, pain (that can be managed via wealth) is far worse for mental health. There is no hope of escape. Money gives hope of quality of life, babies give money. Yep, I'd do it and I can see why so many others would be willing to as well. This is why it is so dangerous.

 

[thrasherpix]

I don't feel like clicking on the article, so I'm gleaning from what's posted here. If a million dollars is the average price, I don't think it's going to become common. And there's a lot of more shady things people with that kind of money do, exploitation of the poor, and what the medical industry does. There's definitely worse out there, and I find myself not caring that much about this, though I'm sure there are some infuriating to outright horrific accounts of some involved (there always are).

 

[Bop]

If a million dollars is the average price,

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.

 

[November]

a million dollars is the average price

Its not. The point is, we've just put a price on a human life.

 

[Tome]

I have no problem with this if both parties give their consent and that it is done in a way that doesn't negatively affect the child.

 

[thrasherpix]

I'd have been surprised if it had been, but then what people pay for clothes--even jammies with plastic clogues (at first I figured they were wearing charity, but eventually realized it was an expensive fashion trend)--among other things, what people will pay if they have the money (or even if they don't) barely surprises me anymore.

I don't suppose we have any actuaries on this board, the kind whose job is to put a cost value on human life? I'd be curious what they'd have to say about all this. (As opposed to those who do the math and go with what's cheapest, so if child sweat shop labor is cheaper than robots, or mining where they have to pay, then they use children, because that's less value, more profit. Or I could go into how Nestle continues to give WHO and the world the finger at screwing over poor mothers with breast milk that I don't feel like explaining, just that it's all about the profits. And so on. Heck, a school shrink got a bounty for kids with insurance to be placed in a mental ward until a private investigator working for one of the defrauded insurance companies shut that down, which was about profit vs risk, putting a value on the sanity and health of children. And on and on and on...)

 

[nightshade]

I have no problem with this if both parties give their consent and that it is done in a way that doesn't negatively affect the child.

How do you know it won't affect the child negatively (general you, not personal). To adopt a child people have to go through a lot of questions and checks, but to have a child via surrogacy you don't have that, so you don't know what the parents are going to be like when the mother hands the child over.

There's also the stories of prospective parents abandoning the child once they discover it's not perfect, and may have a disability. 'Incurable' Bridget was born via surrogate in Ukraine and abandoned by her American parents

 

[Stake fodder]

How do you know it won't affect the child negatively (general you, not personal). To adopt a child people have to go through a lot of questions and checks, but to have a child via surrogacy you don't have that, so you don't know what the parents are going to be like when the mother hands the child over.

There's also the stories of prospective parents abandoning the child once they discover it's not perfect, and may have a disability. 'Incurable' Bridget was born via surrogate in Ukraine and abandoned by her American parents

I am conflicted about surrogacy. I dislike its commodification of women's bodies and babies, and yet I support women's right to choose to do it. It exploits poor women, yet they should have the right to earn money that way if they choose.

There should be more oversight, though, like Nightshade mentions above. Parents should not be able to abandon disabled babies, especially considering that they are often being left in poorer countries that have fewer resources to care for them. It should be as illegal as abandoning a baby you have given birth to yourself. It also gets complex if the surrogate mother ends up wanting to keep the baby, especially if it's not biologically hers.

I think it would be better, all told, not to allow it, but the urge to have children is strong in a lot of people, so I don't think it's going to stop, especially since some couples can't adopt, and adoption is complex and expensive in its own right.

 

[Taake]

I have complicated feelings as well, I do think it seems largely exploitative while also ignoring the risks, side-effects, and emotional turmoil of pregnancy for one side of the equation (e.g. Khloe Kardashian getting to keep her body as is, being delivered a baby she didn't carry, while the woman who went through it all just disappears into the dark with - granted probably a fat check - but little oversight or interest from the new 'parents'). When you're in the spotlight, then sure, you probably treat the surrogate mother well enough and make sure to accept the child even if it is born with a disability, but with surrogacy as an industry then we can be pretty sure there's a lot of less well-treated mothers and babies left in its wake. As mentioned above with abandoned babies and the using of less financially stable women.

I was asked to be a surrogate once and it just made me feel very ill at ease, especially when pressure was applied.

But I think a lot of the acceptable commodification of the body these days is pretty objectional. Not to mention the glossing over of women's mental health in regard to this related to pregnancy, abortions, childbirth, etc. Which is surprising, as mental health isn't as taboo anymore and generally a topic people are in support of.

 

[nightshade]

Is there a difference for women who are surrogates with their own eggs, or women that have the embryo planted inside their wombs. Giving up biological baby vs one that is not related to you?

 

[November]

Wont be long until babies wont need a womans womb to be grown in at all. Medical science seems to easily keep children born at 23 weeks gestation alive and thriving into childhood this century.

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.

This is alarmingly low. If children are a commodity, then their production should require fair pay. Full time wage, overtime, labour and delivery bonus, plus recovery. At least.

Feminism wants fair pay for fair work, Surrogacy requires altruism through and through. I duno where this all sits in the human trafficking debate... Not many people are truly passionate about what it all leads to. You can guarantee the medical industry will be charging for its production line babies.

 

[Stake fodder]

Is there a difference for women who are surrogates with their own eggs, or women that have the embryo planted inside their wombs. Giving up biological baby vs one that is not related to you?

I'm not sure it would change the feelings of the suurogate, but I think it would be harder, or impossible, for her to keep the baby. On the other hand, it would be harder for the expectant couple to abandon the baby, so would have that advantage. I don't think it alters my moral qualms about the practice.

 

[nightshade]

This is alarmingly low. If children are a commodity, then their production should require fair pay. Full time wage, overtime, labour and delivery bonus, plus recovery. At least.

In the UK you cannot pay for surrogacy, just any costs that may occur because of it. So if the woman needs to take time off work unpaid, they would make up that cost that type of thing.

 

[nightshade]

Sorry, Lily Collins, but when people outsource childbirth, their motives really count | Martha Gill

It seems like a few years ago, this type of article wouldnt have been written, maybe as more celebrities are named as using surrogates, it changes the narrative?