Surrogacy

jimmycrackcorm · 18-04-2021 5:54pm

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.

The question is if money is not involved, then is surrogacy ok?
After all, plenty of women have babies and give them up for adoption, for which the resulting child is no different than a surrogate acquired child.

If someone adopts a child, who didn't have a prior arrangement, or knowledge of the mother, and then chooses to give the birth mother a gift of money, is that acceptable?

What if the mother wasn't from a poor country, was well-off in her own right and decided she wanted to help a couple wanting a child. Is that acceptable if she enters a financial arrangement?

It just strikes me, that after our SSM and abortion referendums, that there are still people who want to control what other people do with their lives and their bodies, solely based on their own morals.

18-04-2021 5:54pm

bilbot79 wrote: »

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

No they don't. Ask any woman who has had a baby if they are the same afterwards. Physically. Emotionally. Mentally. Add in giving away the child afterwards and there is a whole other layer of emotional and mental complexity. Plus you must have missed the bits where there is added risk caused by added hormones.

This line of reason reminds me of a couple of smart arse oul fellas I used to know years ago who described giving birth to be like shelling peas. It really reveals willful ignorance of a complex experience.

jimmycrackcorm · 18-04-2021 5:56pm

Antares35 wrote: »

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

The comparison of a child to a kidney is absurd.

Jequ0n · 18-04-2021 5:57pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

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.

I don’t have to test anything because I genuinely don’t care about most causes, though there are exceptions of course.
The problem here is that you do not seem to be able to keep emotions out of it.

You cannot dictate what other people do or don’t do, just because you think it’s wrong to do so.

That’s as if someone told you couldn’t eat rasher sandwiches any more because the animal welfare and promise on the packaging were likely unrealistic. Would that change your mind or behaviour? Because everything discussed in this thread is theoretical and based on assumptions.

18-04-2021 5:57pm

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

The question is if money is not involved, then is surrogacy ok?
After all, plenty of women have babies and give them up for adoption, for which the resulting child is no different than a surrogate acquired child.

If someone adopts a child, who didn't have a prior arrangement, or knowledge of the mother, and then chooses to give the birth mother a gift of money, is that acceptable?

What if the mother wasn't from a poor country, was well-off in her own right and decided she wanted to help a couple wanting a child. Is that acceptable if she enters a financial arrangement?

It just strikes me, that after our SSM and abortion referendums, that there are still people who want to control what other people do with their lives and their bodies, solely based on their own morals.

Remove the money element first. Completely.

Then wonder later about all the rest when you see what you are left with.

18-04-2021 6:00pm

Jequ0n wrote: »

I don’t have to test anything because I genuinely don’t care about most causes, though there are exceptions of course.

You cannot dictate what other people do or don’t do, just because you think it’s wrong to do so.

Fair enough. If you don't care about almost anything, then I don't care much about your opinions. Quid pro quo. No worries.

Society "dictates" all the time what we can and can't do. Try walking naked down your street.

Jequ0n · 18-04-2021 6:06pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Fair enough. If you don't care about almost anything, then I don't care much about your opinions. Quid pro quo. No worries.

Society "dictates" all the time what we can and can't do. Try walking naked down your street.

Because so far you have been really accepting of others’ opinions and feedback?

Every rule/ law can and is being bent all the time. That’s the point: just because you ban something doesn’t mean it will stop

One eyed Jack · 18-04-2021 6:16pm

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

It just strikes me, that after our SSM and abortion referendums, that there are still people who want to control what other people do with their lives and their bodies, solely based on their own morals.

I don’t think it’s that anyone wants to control what other people do with their lives or their bodies at an individual level like you’re suggesting based upon their own moral values. It’s rather a question of examining the ethics of surrogacy itself and as it pertains to a society, all aspects of surrogacy whether it be commercial or altruistic surrogacy.

I don’t have an issue with the idea of surrogacy itself in principle, I don’t think many people actually do have issues with surrogacy in principle. That’s why there’s not much heard of it from any particular perspective, there’s as many negative narratives as there are positive, from exploitation of Ukrainian women to the military wives in the US who’s medical treatment is covered by their spouses insurance provider. Most states in the US have legislation which is very favourable towards surrogacy, the complete opposite of most European countries, and then there is Ireland where surrogacy isn’t legislated for at all.

It’s an incredibly complex and difficult issue for people who have to avail of surrogacy and I don’t think it’s nearly as simple as is being made out to be in this thread tbh. There are undoubtedly negative aspects to it for people, and by that same token there are many positive aspects to it for people. Legislating for it in Irish law would bring some degree of certainty for a lot of people who wish to avail of surrogacy services, and for those people who wish to provide surrogacy services, but it’s difficult to legislate for that in such a way that would completely remove all aspects of the potential for exploitation of other human beings, especially when there are no standards in International law between different countries and jurisdictions.

volchitsa · 18-04-2021 6:17pm

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

The comparison of a child to a kidney is absurd.

Yes the kidney can't go on to suffer from being abused or neglected.

Creating a child away in order to give away to strangers is a far more serious thing to do.

By giving birth to it, you have some responsibility for its future happiness, and no control over that.

volchitsa · 18-04-2021 6:21pm

bilbot79 wrote: »

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

Well this is not true. Even assuming the pregnancy goes perfectly, which not all do.

bilbot79 · 18-04-2021 6:26pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

No they don't. Ask any woman who has had a baby if they are the same afterwards. Physically. Emotionally. Mentally. Add in giving away the child afterwards and there is a whole other layer of emotional and mental complexity. Plus you must have missed the bits where there is added risk caused by added hormones.

This line of reason reminds me of a couple of smart arse oul fellas I used to know years ago who described giving birth to be like shelling peas. It really reveals willful ignorance of a complex experience.

For the purposes of comparison to losing a kidney it is indeed a return to status normal. Of course there are impacts to being pregnant but it happens to lots of people all the time and is entirely normal in the grand scheme of life, without taking anything anyway from the titan efforts and experiences of all mother's that have been pregnant. Being down one kidney however is entirely different and is a very poor comparison.

volchitsa · 18-04-2021 6:44pm

bilbot79 wrote: »

For the purposes of comparison to losing a kidney it is indeed a return to status normal. Of course there are impacts to being pregnant but it happens to lots of people all the time and is entirely normal in the grand scheme of life, without taking anything anyway from the titan efforts and experiences of all mother's that have been pregnant. Being down one kidney however is entirely different and is a very poor comparison.

Most people are absolutely fine with only one kidney.
On the other hand my back has never got back to normal after pregnancy, and I have pretty much constant back pain now. The solution seems to be to put up with it, sh1t happens.

Antares35 · 18-04-2021 6:58pm

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

The comparison of a child to a kidney is absurd.

It's the comparison of two situations where one party buys rights to another party's body.

Lmkrnr · 18-04-2021 7:08pm

How do children who have went through this react when they are older. I presume the people paying for this service will tell the Child when they are older that we paid a company in X to find a women and make you, then hand you over to us for an agreed price.

machiavellianme · 18-04-2021 7:19pm

Lmkrnr wrote: »

How do children who have went through this react when they are older. I presume the people paying for this service will tell the Child when they are older that we paid a company in X to find a women and make you, then hand you over to us for an agreed price.

Why? Biologically, it's their child. Would you expect your parents to tell you about the night they did the deed to create you in great detail?

18-04-2021 8:45pm

machiavellianme wrote: »

Why? Biologically, it's their child. Would you expect your parents to tell you about the night they did the deed to create you in great detail?

Not always.

bilbot79 · 18-04-2021 8:49pm

Lmkrnr wrote: »

How do children who have went through this react when they are older. I presume the people paying for this service will tell the Child when they are older that we paid a company in X to find a women and make you, then hand you over to us for an agreed price.

This is much ado about nothing. Like their parents before them they will likely be modern and open-minded and once they're told early and honestly will find no issue with their origin story. This is how the world works now and will be incredibly commonplace by the time today's children are old enough to know how babies are made.

Jequ0n · 18-04-2021 8:54pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Not always.

So many nuances.
The example I mentioned saw a couple buy sperm and egg fitting their specifics because the woman in question wanted to give birth. They have several children now, their optics picked from a catalogue, and the whole world incl the kids thinks that they are their own even though they are not.

Personally I find this far more problematic than a standard surrogate business situation.

And in case someone wonders: everything, although illegal, was actioned via Western European countries.

So ban away things

18-04-2021 9:06pm

bilbot79 wrote: »

This is much ado about nothing. Like their parents before them they will likely be modern and open-minded and once they're told early and honestly will find no issue with their origin story. This is how the world works now and will be incredibly commonplace by the time today's children are old enough to know how babies are made.

Heh. Maybe not. Maybe the kids will be strict vegan anti globalist climate warriors who dedicate their lives to protesting against the exploitation of poor enslaved banana and coffee farmers, and they might very well feel wtf if they find out their birth mother was in distressed financial straits owing rent for example and made the decision to rent their womb to provide a baby via an agency who was facilitating people from richer countries to buy surrogacy services in poorer countries. Whatcha gonna say to them then, much ado about nothing, be modern, open minded and freewheeling like me kiddo?

It will not be commonplace for economically better off people to rent poorer women's wombs or purchase babies in the future - I think on the contrary it will be widely understood to not be a value neutral activity.
In fact in spite of your seemingly bohemian attitude that all is groovy, and people who object are throwback cracpots, the truth is it is already completely illegal to do so in many places in the world. For good reason.

angel eyes 2012 · 18-04-2021 9:39pm

volchitsa wrote: »

Most people are absolutely fine with only one kidney.
On the other hand my back has never got back to normal after pregnancy, and I have pretty much constant back pain now. The solution seems to be to put up with it, sh1t happens.

I find it interesting that some women who are extremely fortunate to give birth think they hold the upper hand on medical issues and can judge other women who suffer with fertility issues.

I had a kidney removed 20 years ago and I suffer with the consequences even now but as you say, sh1t happens.

18-04-2021 9:45pm

I'm not sure of my own position on surrogacy but I can't help but wonder what some of the stronger opinions holders here would feel if they were infertile.

Jequ0n · 18-04-2021 9:50pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'm not sure of my own position on surrogacy but I can't help but wonder what some of the stronger opinions holders here would feel if they were infertile.

Doesn’t happen unless you’re a bad Cristian so they don’t need to worry

jam_mac_jam · 18-04-2021 9:54pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'm not sure of my own position on surrogacy but I can't help but wonder what some of the stronger opinions holders here would feel if they were infertile.

I think that's a very fair question. I can understand why people who do it. And to be honest that is their business and none of mine.

And I know how much it can hurt people who are infertile and I understand why they do it.

18-04-2021 9:54pm

Jequ0n wrote: »

Doesn’t happen unless you’re a bad Cristian so they don’t need to worry

I think if I were desperate for a child then I'd go down the surrogacy route. No amount or moralising or ethical/not ethical would get in my way. That's how I imagine the lengths some people will go too, rightly or wrongly I won't stand in judgement.

18-04-2021 9:57pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not sure of my own position on surrogacy but I can't help but wonder what some of the stronger opinions holders here would feel if they were infertile.

It’s a difficult one. I know a couple who adopted from Russia over 20 years ago. They felt that they were doing a good deed, even if it cost them the price of a small house! When they went to meet their baby in an orphanage, they thought that she was that - an orphan. When they went back to collect her, they found that her mother was still alive and was HIV positive when she gave birth. They went ahead. They live their daughter dearly, but she’s tormented by the family who gave her up. They are all going through Hell for the past few years. The girl is so resentful of both her mother and her adoptive parents, who she feels bought for from her rightful family.

18-04-2021 10:07pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It’s a difficult one. I know a couple who adopted from Russia over 20 years ago. They felt that they were doing a good deed, even if it cost them the price of a small house! When they went to meet their baby in an orphanage, they thought that she was that - an orphan. When they went back to collect her, they found that her mother was still alive and was HIV positive when she gave birth. They went ahead. They live their daughter dearly, but she’s tormented by the family who gave her up. They are all going through Hell for the past few years. The girl is so resentful of both her mother and her adoptive parents, who she feels bought for from her rightful family.

Adoption is extremely complex. In the research I have carried out there are a number of factors which can determine the stability of the child. One is the healthy attachment they form with the adoptive parents.
Two is them knowing from an early age that they are adopted.
Three is the careful nurturing of their identity to ensure they always feel a sense of belonging and security.

Surrogacy is also complex. Three people and a child. There's emerging and some established, evidence of the power of the bond in utero. For the child to then not have that continuing bond can be painful. Of course that can be mitigated against by the new parents.

There's no easy answers for those who so want a child, and I'm talking about an all consuming want. I think in a debate about the ethics of surrogacy their pain must be acknowledged.

Jequ0n · 18-04-2021 10:13pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I think if I were desperate for a child then I'd go down the surrogacy route. No amount or moralising or ethical/not ethical would get in my way. That's how I imagine the lengths some people will go too, rightly or wrongly I won't stand in judgement.

I never want a child so it’s not an issue for me, but like you I can’t see why you’d condemn someone who wants to avail of the services.
I’m very tired of people judging everyone and everything

18-04-2021 10:16pm

Jequ0n wrote: »

I never want a child so it’s not an issue for me, but like you I can’t see why you’d condemn someone who wants to avail of the services.
I’m very tired of people judging everyone and everything

I'm tired of that too.

18-04-2021 10:16pm

Jequ0n wrote: »

I never want a child so it’s not an issue for me, but like you I can’t see why you’d condemn someone who wants to avail of the services.
I’m very tired of people judging everyone and everything

The ticking time bomb is the reactions of the babies when they grow into teenagers and young adults. Any parent will tell you that that age span is the most idealistic!

Jequ0n · 18-04-2021 10:25pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The ticking time bomb is the reactions of the babies when they grow into teenagers and young adults. Any parent will tell you that that age span is the most idealistic!

I’m sorry, i don’t understand what you mean. Could you explain it please.
I sometimes don’t understand things

Surrogacy

Comments