Surrogacy

Jequ0n · 18-04-2021 4:34pm

wench wrote: »

Have they spoken to the surrogate? Or only to those who have benefited from the arrangement?

You can argue it’s not her first rodeo so she knows what she signed up to and can handle it

wench · 18-04-2021 4:34pm

Jequ0n wrote: »

You can argue it’s not her first rodeo so she knows what she signed up to and can handle it

Or you could argue she is still desperate for money, and has no other skill that pays as well

Lmkrnr · 18-04-2021 4:36pm

Kids as commodities. Seen that before!!

I am totally against it. Joe and Jane doe are out looking for a blonde haired, blue eyed kid like an online shop.

Its wrong.

First Up · 18-04-2021 4:37pm

wench wrote:

Have they spoken to the surrogate? Or only to those who have benefited from the arrangement?

They don't know who the surrogate will be yet. One visit to Ukraine so far. More to come.

They have joined some groups sharing information on surrogacy (and miscarriages) so plenty of experiences and advice to work with.

volchitsa · 18-04-2021 4:39pm

Jequ0n wrote: »

You can argue it’s not her first rodeo so she knows what she signed up to and can handle it

Don't know where you get this from - that was just one random example, but by definition there's always a first time for everybody. What happens to the ones who can't handle it?

First Up · 18-04-2021 4:40pm

volchitsa wrote:

I don't know, you seem very keen to assess their motivations all the same. It's just that you're determined to put a positive spin on it all.

Well I'm looking at it with a more open mind than you, that's for sure.

bilbot79 · 18-04-2021 4:46pm

In surprised about the amount of negative angles towards surrogacy on this thread and I'd wonder does this originate in the same types of people who think children out of wedlock are abominations and gays should be allowed to marry because you can't have a 'daddy and a daddy'

There are many many different lens to look through when thinking about surrogacy and the bells and whistles that go with it.

For me, I look at the 9 month pregnant women outside the Rotunda smoking their brains out, possibly on permanent welfare and compare them to an infertile couple who work hard and pay a veritable fortune simply to create a good citizen for Ireland. There are much worse ways to bring a child into this world.

wench · 18-04-2021 4:49pm

First Up wrote: »

They don't know who the surrogate will be yet. One visit to Ukraine so far. More to come.

They have joined some groups sharing information on surrogacy (and miscarriages) so plenty of experiences and advice to work with.

So they have had no contact with actual surrogates, but you say they have considered every point of view, including that of the surrogate.

If they only have contact with those using or selling the service, that is hardly going to give a full picture of what happens to the surrogate before and after they pick up their freshly produced baby.

Lmkrnr · 18-04-2021 4:50pm

volchitsa wrote: »

Right, cos they wouldn't either choose to hear, or choose to tell others, the "rosy" version of events? Of course not.

Why would Ukrainian women be any different from Irish women? IOW what would your reaction be if your sister announced she was doing this for an unknown Ukrainian family? She'd have children herself (surrogates mostly do) so how would you expect your nieces and nephews to take the news that they were having a little sister or brother but it was going to be sold?

And why does it bother you to respond to that if you believe that Ukrainian women get more out of it than money? It's only hypothetical if your source is unreliable, or else if Irish women are very different about pregnancy and birth to Ukrainian women.

Spot on, 100% agree.

Lmkrnr · 18-04-2021 4:52pm

bilbot79 wrote: »

In surprised about the amount of negative angles towards surrogacy on this thread and I'd wonder does this originate in the same types of people who think children out of wedlock are abominations and gays should be allowed to marry because you can't have a 'daddy and a daddy'

There are many many different lens to look through when thinking about surrogacy and the bells and whistles that go with it.

For me, I look at the 9 month pregnant women outside the Rotunda smoking their brains out, possibly on permanent welfare and compare them to an infertile couple who work hard and pay a veritable fortune simply to create a good citizen for Ireland. There are much worse ways to bring a child into this world.

Will you stop. What's working hard got to do with being able to have child.

Money doesn't give someone a right to buy a child.

Jequ0n · 18-04-2021 4:59pm

volchitsa wrote: »

Don't know where you get this from - that was just one random example, but by definition there's always a first time for everybody. What happens to the ones who can't handle it?

That’s the surrogate’s problem to deal with and not your or my problem

First Up · 18-04-2021 5:00pm

wench wrote:

So they have had no contact with actual surrogates, but you say they have considered every point of view, including that of the surrogate.

I said they looked at it from every angle, including the welfare of the surrogate.

wench · 18-04-2021 5:03pm

First Up wrote: »

I said they looked at it from every angle, including the welfare of the surrogate.

My bad. So by welfare, did you just mean physical welfare?
Is their concern just that she be a healthy incubator, or do they care about her well being before, during and after the process?

volchitsa · 18-04-2021 5:08pm

bilbot79 wrote: »

In surprised about the amount of negative angles towards surrogacy on this thread and I'd wonder does this originate in the same types of people who think children out of wedlock are abominations and gays should be allowed to marry because you can't have a 'daddy and a daddy'

There are many many different lens to look through when thinking about surrogacy and the bells and whistles that go with it.

For me, I look at the 9 month pregnant women outside the Rotunda smoking their brains out, possibly on permanent welfare and compare them to an infertile couple who work hard and pay a veritable fortune simply to create a good citizen for Ireland. There are much worse ways to bring a child into this world.

In my case it's the money aspect that I'm uncomfortable with. Wealthy people (relatively) basically buying the use of a poor woman's body for the better part of a year, and with very little certainty for her if things go wrong.

First Up · 18-04-2021 5:10pm

wench wrote:

My bad. So by welfare, did you just mean physical welfare? Is their concern just that she be a healthy incubator, or do they care about her well being before, during and after the process?

They were reassured to their satisfaction that the surrogate's well-being would be looked after up to and including post natal care.

Lmkrnr · 18-04-2021 5:16pm

First Up wrote: »

They were reassured to their satisfaction that the surrogate's well-being would be looked after up to and including post natal care.

Reassured by a company set up to make profit from this arrangement. Of course they are going to say the host will be fine. Otherwise the sale wouldn't go through

18-04-2021 5:21pm

First Up wrote: »

They were reassured to their satisfaction that the surrogate's well-being would be looked after up to and including post natal care.

My second hand car sales person said my car is a fantastic buy. Has always been brilliantly looked after, apparently. Never even one single bump of a kerb! Previously owned by one extremely careful nun in an enclosed order.

First Up · 18-04-2021 5:24pm

Lmkrnr wrote:

Reassured by a company set up to make profit from this arrangement. Of course they are going to say the host will be fine. Otherwise the sale wouldn't go through

isha wrote:

My second hand car sales person said my car is a fantastic buy. Has always been brilliantly looked after, apparently. Never even one single bump of a kerb! Previously owned by one extremely careful nun in an enclosed order.

They were reassured to their satisfaction. If that isn't enough for you then so be it.

wench · 18-04-2021 5:31pm

First Up wrote: »

They were reassured to their satisfaction. If that isn't enough for you then so be it.

So they were told what they wanted to hear. Got ya.

18-04-2021 5:34pm

First Up wrote: »

They were reassured to their satisfaction. If that isn't enough for you then so be it.

They were reassured by the people working in an agency which profits very handsomely from the rental of various wombs and sales of various newborns that the specific woman whose womb will be rented for their benefit and who will give her newborn infant to them is happy, cared for and in good health.
What on earth else would you expect them to say?

Jequ0n · 18-04-2021 5:39pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

They were reassured by the people working in an agency which profits very handsomely from the rental of various wombs and sales of various newborns that the specific woman whose womb will be rented for their benefit and who will give her newborn infant to them is happy, cared for and in good health.
What on earth else would you expect them to say?

And this is the same with every service provider/ company who you chose to believe. It’s a business that responds to demand.
Like it or not but you can’t stop the practice by shaming people as you’ll just drive it under ground and turn it into a bigger taboo

bilbot79 · 18-04-2021 5:43pm

volchitsa wrote: »

In my case it's the money aspect that I'm uncomfortable with. Wealthy people (relatively) basically buying the use of a poor woman's body for the better part of a year, and with very little certainty for her if things go wrong.

When I was in college some of my housemates helped fund their tuition by volunteering as guinea pigs in medical trials. This involves medical risk and is no different. It sometimes goes wrong and most of the time goes right, just like surrogacy. At 3 years wages, its hardly exploitation either.

I think peoples ears are pricked here because it involves motherhood and women's bodies but some of the principles being railed against exist equally in other areas such as the example given.

Antares35 · 18-04-2021 5:44pm

bilbot79 wrote: »

In surprised about the amount of negative angles towards surrogacy on this thread and I'd wonder does this originate in the same types of people who think children out of wedlock are abominations and gays should be allowed to marry because you can't have a 'daddy and a daddy'

There are many many different lens to look through when thinking about surrogacy and the bells and whistles that go with it.

For me, I look at the 9 month pregnant women outside the Rotunda smoking their brains out, possibly on permanent welfare and compare them to an infertile couple who work hard and pay a veritable fortune simply to create a good citizen for Ireland. There are much worse ways to bring a child into this world.

Well of course if you deduce your argument down to polar opposites then you'll come off looking like the more reasonable one

Just because people do "worse things" doesn't necessarily make something else right. They aren't mutually exclusive.

For the record I voted yes to marriage equality, have a child "out of wedlock" and I don't support surrogacy.

18-04-2021 5:46pm

Jequ0n wrote: »

And this is the same with every service provider/ company who you chose to believe. It’s a business that responds to demand.
Like it or not but you can’t stop the practice by shaming people as you’ll just drive it under ground and turn it into a bigger taboo

Not all services are justifiable. Lots of people want or feel entitled to demand lots of different things and services that are not justifiable.

Your argument is not good because it is wholly based on laissez faire moral relativism. You can test that by applying your argument to other services and see if the argùment holds up. If we operated as a civilisation by the principles of such hands off relativism re all services or goods demanded, we would live in hell.

bilbot79 · 18-04-2021 5:46pm

Antares35 wrote: »

Well of course if you deduce your argument down to polar opposites then you'll come off looking like the more reasonable one

Just because people do "worse things" doesn't necessarily make something else right. They aren't mutually exclusive.

For the record I voted yes to marriage equality, have a child "out of wedlock" and I don't support surrogacy.

Great

Antares35 · 18-04-2021 5:46pm

volchitsa wrote: »

In my case it's the money aspect that I'm uncomfortable with. Wealthy people (relatively) basically buying the use of a poor woman's body for the better part of a year, and with very little certainty for her if things go wrong.

Agree. I wonder if it was wealthy people buying kidneys from poor people would there be more against it.

bilbot79 · 18-04-2021 5:47pm

Antares35 wrote: »

Agree. I wonder if it was wealthy people buying kidneys from poor people would there be more against it.

Yes there would because the victim would be less a kidney. The surrogate returns to status normal.

jam_mac_jam · 18-04-2021 5:50pm

bilbot79 wrote: »

Yes there would because the victim would be less a kidney. The surrogate returns to status normal.

I've had a child. If you gave me a choice I would rather a kidney removed then go through it again and give the child up.

You don't just go back to normal.

Antares35 · 18-04-2021 5:52pm

bilbot79 wrote: »

Yes there would because the victim would be less a kidney. The surrogate returns to status normal.

Really? Do you know anything about the physical and emotional impact of childbearing on a woman? And that's before you even consider it in the context of being separated permanently from the child you've birthed.

bilbot79 · 18-04-2021 5:52pm

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

I've had a child. If you gave me a choice I would rather a kidney removed then go through it again and give the child up.

You don't just go back to normal.

Yes you've had a child but you haven't had a kidney removed.

Surrogacy

Comments