Surrogacy

First Up

isha wrote:

Are they going to allow the birth mother to participate in the child's life? Are they going to honour her place as birth mother? Will the child know their birth mother? Will their be connection? You present them as utterly scrupulous, spending time, spending fortunes, treasuring etc - but surely if a woman is giving birth to your child one's scruples must extend first and foremost to a fundamental relationship with that other very relevant and important human being?

As I understand it, the surrogate mother in Ukraine is quite happy with the arrangement, which her doing it for the third time would seem to confirm.

First Up

Strawberry Milkshake wrote:

As much as I can feel complete sympathy for parents who cannot have a child, having one child then fulfills that loss. But to keep using the service for more and more children has me questioning whether if it’s a lifestyle choice “oh we want 3 kids to be the perfect family unitâ€.

What business of yours is any of that?

LeakyLime

appledrop wrote: »

I'm sorry but I don't buy this line that anyone who adopts or has a child through surrogacy, treasures them or loves them so much more.

I still remember the horrific case of Tristan Dowes, where they basicially just dropped him back to orphanage after a few years and said no thanks we don't want him.

We have also heard countless stories over the years of Irish children who were 'given' up for adoption but really bought often by Anerican couples and a lot of those children didn't have good experiences with their adoptive families.

Yes this is so true. Just because you can afford to pay someone to carry your child (or pay for adoption), does not mean you will be a good parent.

€100,000 is a lot to me, but it is not a lot of money to everyone.

The profile of parents (people with money and influence in society) flying to Ukraine is one of the reasons the subject is not adequately discussed or investigated.

osarusan

osarusan wrote: »

I don't have a system. I said I believe it's possible to come up with one.

But part of defending a practice by saying it can be regulated must logically involve at least some partial envisioning of what such a defensible system would look like - otherwise to make the declaration in the first place is casual hand waving and wishful thinking.

''Regulate it'' is a deeply suspect catch-all suggestion often trotted out for issues where morality is complex. I think it stems from a notion fundamental to exploitative capitalism that everything is basically for sale and that every sale can somehow be regulated.

First Up

LeakyLime wrote:

The profile of parents (people with money and influence in society) flying to Ukraine is one of the reasons the subject is not adequately discussed or investigated.

The couple I know have no "influence in society". They are spending all their savings and are being helped out financially by both sets of parents. They understand the risks.

appledrop

LeakyLime wrote: »

Yes this is so true. Just because you can afford to pay someone to carry your child (or pay for adoption), does not mean you will be a good parent.

€100,000 is a lot to me, but it is not a lot of money to everyone.

The profile of parents (people with money and influence in society) flying to Ukraine is one of the reasons the subject is not adequately discussed or investigated.

Yeah the classic example for me is all the Hollywood couples who adopt or use surrogates to have a baby. The are fawned over by media about how wonderful they are for adopting this poor child.

Nearly everyone of them ends up divorced.

So the kids all growing up in broken marriages, is that really dream come through and better life for them then staying in their country of birth where their family might not have much money but love them?

I still can't believe no-one in media calls this out.

It's mind boggling really.

First Up

First Up wrote: »

What business of yours is any of that?

The end ''products'' here are human beings. These are not some value neutral material transactions. It makes a huge difference. Because we are human beings we have an interest in what happens to other human beings.

First Up

First Up wrote: »

They understand the risks.

To whom?

First Up

isha wrote:

The end ''products'' here are human beings. These are not some value neutral material transactions. It makes a huge difference. Because we are human beings we have an interest in what happens to other human beings.

Have as much interest as you like but that doesn't extend to lecturing them about what size of family they should have.

First Up

First Up wrote: »

What business of yours is any of that?

It’s comes across as exploitation.

LeakyLime

First Up wrote: »

The couple I know have no "influence in society". They are spending all their savings and are being helped out financially by both sets of parents. They understand the risks.

If they can afford to pay a company for surrogacy (most money does not go to the women), they have strong 'social capital' in society.

First Up

isha wrote:

To whom?

As I said, they have looked at it from everyone's perspective, including the surrogate mother.

First Up

Strawberry Milkshake wrote:

It’s comes across as exploitation.

Then I suppose we will all just have to hope you can get over it.

LeakyLime

First Up wrote: »

As I said, they have looked at it from everyone's perspective, including the surrogate mother.

And when looking at it for the surrogate mother's perspective, what did they see?

Ukraine need to look at their own regulation and work on improving the lives of their female citizens so they do not need to resort to this work for money. There is no reason the women do it, other than money.

"
Oksana’s motivation for being a surrogate mother is crystal clear: “Few [women] stop after the first surrogacy. They do more because they need money. So did I. No other motivation exists,” she explains.
"
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/odr/ukraines-surrogate-mothers-struggle-under-quarantine/


Hopefully Ukraine will be in a position to ban it - there are politicians there working towards this. Although it's a multi-million dollar industry now and lobbyists have influence in the Parliament.

volchitsa

LeakyLime wrote: »

And when looking at it for the surrogate mother's perspective, what did they see?

That she was getting paid for it and so had no reason to complain?

LeakyLime wrote: »

Ukraine need to look at their own regulation and work on improving the lives of their female citizens so they do not need to resort to this work for money. There is no reason the women do it, other than money.

"
Oksana’s motivation for being a surrogate mother is crystal clear: “Few [women] stop after the first surrogacy. They do more because they need money. So did I. No other motivation exists,” she explains.
"
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/odr/ukraines-surrogate-mothers-struggle-under-quarantine/


Hopefully Ukraine will be in a position to ban it - there are politicians there working towards this. Although it's a multi-million dollar industry now and lobbyists have influence in the Parliament.

The poster is not willing to look at it any other way than they already have done, which makes me wonder about how much attention was given to the surrogate's point of view.

First Up

LeakyLime wrote:

If they can afford to pay a company for surrogacy (most money does not go to the women), they have strong 'social capital' in society.

Yes, they are also paying for the regulatory system and oversight, the egg retrieval/fertilisation process, all associated tests, consultancy and the medical treatment of the surrogate mother during pregnancy, birth and aftercare.

Not sure how to convert that to social capital.

First Up

LeakyLime wrote:

Ukraine need to look at their own regulation and work on improving the lives of their female citizens so they do not need to resort to this work for money. There is no reason the women do it, other than money.

Money that helps the upkeep of their own family, housing, healthcare, education etc.

Of course if you have a plan to improve the lives of Ukrainian women (maybe men and children too?) I am sure they will welcome it.

LeakyLime

First Up wrote: »

Money that helps the upkeep of their own family, housing, healthcare, education etc.

Of course if you have a plan to improve the lives of Ukrainian women (maybe men and children too?) I am sure they will welcome it.

On the subject of men and children, a lot of these women have their own children. They do it to improve their lives.

The women's husbands/partners and children lose out during the 9 - 10 months of pregnancy as well, and I can only imagine how confusing it is for their children.

volchitsa

LeakyLime wrote: »

On the subject of men and children, a lot of these women have their own children. They do it to improve their lives.

The women's husbands/partners and children lose out during the 9 - 10 months of pregnancy as well, and I can only imagine how confusing it is for their children.

It must be absolutely traumatising for those children. I wonder how much thought is ever given to their well being.

First Up

First Up wrote: »

Then I suppose we will all just have to hope you can get over it.

Facetious argument.

First Up

LeakyLime wrote:

The women's husbands/partners and children lose out during the 9 - 10 months of pregnancy as well, and I can only imagine how confusing it is for their children.

volchitsa wrote:

It must be absolutely traumatising for those children. I wonder how much thought is ever given to their well being.

Maybe give them some credit for being resourceful and responsible people who are providing for their own families by bringing joy to others?

They might appreciate that more than lectures on Boards.

First Up

First Up wrote: »

Maybe give them some credit for being resourceful and responsible people who are providing for their own families by bringing joy to others?

They might appreciate that more than lectures on Boards.

''lectures on boards'' = expression of concern for the complex moral implications of a financial transaction that is illegal in most countries and that puts a huge health burden and emotional pressure upon another person's body and mind.
Roh kay. :rolleyes:

First Up

isha wrote:

Facetious argument.

No, just sarcasm.

LeakyLime

First Up wrote: »

Maybe give them some credit for being resourceful and responsible people who are providing for their own families by bringing joy to others?

They might appreciate that more than lectures on Boards.

The women in Ukraine are not concerned with the joy they bring to others, they do it solely for the money. This is evident if you read anything on the subject.

Women in Ireland can be surrogates out of the goodness of their hearts, if they so wish, to bring joy to others.

It's rarely done - for obvious reasons.

First Up

isha wrote:

''lectures on boards'' = expression of concern for the complex moral implications of a financial transaction that is illegal in most countries and that puts a huge health burden and emotional pressure upon another person's body and mind. Roh kay.

Don't forget the questioning of the motivation and ethics of everyone involved.

jam_mac_jam

First Up wrote: »

Don't forget the questioning of the motivation and ethics of everyone involved.

They are buying children. Human beings.

I would worry about a society that didn't see ethical questions with that.

LeakyLime

LeakyLime wrote: »

The women in Ukraine are not concerned with the joy they bring to others, they do it solely for the money. This is evident if you read anything on the subject.

Women in Ireland can be surrogates out of the goodness of their hearts, if they so wish, to bring joy to others.

It's rarely done - for obvious reasons.

Indeed. There is something of the 'sex work is work' vibe of luxury opinion off this. You won't see many well-off middle class women having a bash at getting into a potentially dangerous stranger's car to give them a blow job for cash. I doubt sincerely that any woman who had any other way of getting by is going to rent out her body for 9 months, get dosed up with implantation or fertility drugs or both, go through the profoundly impactful experience of full term pregnancy and delivery and then happily hand over her new born if there was any other way for her to get the cash she obviously needs together.

Antares35

Something that never sat well with me tbh. I thought I was the only one..it's so often presented in a light that suggests there is nothing to be questioned. I was really surprised to find out there are others who feel the same way.

I've had people tell me my views aren't relevant because we've been lucky enough to have children naturally, and I've never known the pain of infertility. But even before we had children, surrogacy made me uncomfortable. The idea of just taking a newborn baby from the woman who carried and gave birth to them - just seems so cruel. A baby needs it's mother, and won't recognise that the only mother it's ever known is "not genetically it's mother". They are born knowing your voice, your smell etc. They mooch up to find the breast to feed and comfort. I wonder if being taken away and given to strangers (insofar as the baby is concerned) has a lasting impact.

The only way to ensure the system isn't abused is, IMO, to de-monetise it. Commodifying children is wrong. And where there is money involved, there will be an inherent power imbalance irrespective of good or stated intentions or positions.

Edit, having had one pregnancy and in the midst of another, my mental health suffered during both, moreso second time. Not saying this is true for everyone, but it's not a simple case of just having a baby and handing it over. And there are emotional as well as physical dangers to be considered.

Ckendrick

First Up wrote: »

I can only speak for the couple I know who have thought about it and looked at it from every angle, including the welfare of the surrogate mother. They didn't make the decision lightly.

They want a baby. Badly. They’ve got one now. I’m genuinely wishing them the best of luck.
But out there somewhere is the woman who gestated that baby and bonded with the child growing in her womb. Someday that child will have to be told that and that he or she was purchased like any other commodity in a supply and demand arrangement.
That can’t be avoided.

mohawk

First Up wrote: »

The couple I know have no "influence in society". They are spending all their savings and are being helped out financially by both sets of parents. They understand the risks.

Do they understand the risks to the birth mother? Do they understand that she could be left with lifelong health issues after giving birth to their child? Personally I couldn’t have that on my conscious.
Despite all the warm fuzzy stories surrounding surrogacy. When you break it down you are buying a baby and generally speaking exploiting a poor woman’s body to achieve your own personal wants.