Surrogacy - Womb to rent?

Since this topic was raised in the referendum thread with some alarming aspects of contemporary life I spotted this and thought the subject deserves a thread of it’s own.

Jesus could you find a more slanted article or headline? Custody of the baby was won by its father. Hardly controversial.

Now why would the Mail harp on about the dad’s sexuality and not the mother’s I wonder?

There are many interesting and controversial examples of surrogacy disputes which are thought-provoking. This is not one of them.

Family law cases are usually barred from reporting, no? Neither of them is allowed to say what went on in court…

1 Like

For me it raised the undeniable fact that universally motherhood is supreme. I was once told women were equal to warriors in some cultures since childbirth was perilous now we seem to be moved to treat it a western a la carte style.

Best laid plans of mice and (wo)men, but when that child arrives you can not account for the maternal instinct. Therefore I can not see how any pre-existing deals (which is another issue in itself). It was suggested to me that around this time women have been given much lenience for any illegal actions. I’m not sure but it underlines the idea.

I’m actually kind of clueless to the legalities and aspects of surrogacy in Ireland and globally and the referendum thread brought it square to my attention.

It’ hard to comment on this particular case because we don’t know the details but the secrecy aspect woudl make it all the more appalling a vista if it turned out the mother handed bonded with the child on all levels and was now forced to hand over the child to someone who is not it’s mother. Parent or otherwise, men are not entirely equal at time like this so what happened in this instance you may wonder. I find it unsettling.

Your point is not related just to surrogacy though. It occurs in adoptions, surrogacy, mothers deemed unfit to care for their children, and women in prison. The linked article is one-sided and bigoted.

Erm, men have had to fight long and hard to get parenting rights. For a long time they had no rights whatsoever. As I say, I’m pretty sure family law proceedings are held in camera (in secret) for the protection of both the parents and the children. The courts these days are reasonably sophisticated when it comes to deciding guardianship of children. They will still err on the side of the mother in the absence of any reason to do otherwise.

The fact that the father is gay is irrelevant. That it is a surrogacy is also mostly irrelevant. Are there better ways to determine parenthood than sperm/eggs/birth? I don’t know, but the law hasn’t caught up if there are.

The fact that the judge in this case appears to be a nutter may be relevant, but may not as we’ve only seen one side painted.

By the way, I feel dirty for reading the Daily Mail and its faux outrage. Thanks for that.

Such is the price of the secrecy as the benefit has been weighed.

You didn’t have to click! :slight_smile: Yes the article implies a lot, and leaves more questions, but the thread is about surrogacy so the pitfalls for all which includes society, the whole human family. One example over another. The idea is exemplified by such tabloid handling of a very precious matter that is devalued by such means.

Surrogacy is not legal in Ireland is that right?

So yes it is legal but the rights of a non-womb mother are doubtful. Keep in mind that a non-birthing mother may in fact be the genetic mother so it’s really hard to navigate it.

The woman purposely had a child with a man she knew to be gay and in a gay relationship.
I find it conflicting that she appears to have an issue with the child being brought up in a gay house, yet has no apparent issue with allowing one of those gay men becoming the biological father of the child.

Unless, of course, this case has nothing to do with the gay issue.
Perhaps it involves a woman who bore a child under a surrogacy arrangement, then changed her mind after the birth.
Then again, perhaps she never changed her mind.

Scenario :
A wife, due to medical complications, cannot carry a baby to full term.

So the couple take their own fertilised egg and use a surrogate to carry it to full term.

Whose motherhood is supreme, the surrogate or the biological mother ?

We seem to be well on our way to Huxley’s Brave New World generally and the normalisation of the surrogacy process (via the usual ‘human rights’/‘heartrending’ media mantras) seems to be a means by which the human reproductive process may be ‘streamlined’…Who is to say that we wont reach a time sometime soon when professional women will, as a matter of course, outsource their reproductive role to the lower castes of the third world…or maybe even closer to home?? In a society that values career progression and monetary value above most everything else, Id say its quite likely…

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brave_New_World

A few more interesting articles about the issues in and around the trade in surrogate children which make quite uncomfortable reading given the economic gulf between the parties…with, anecdotally, the majority of cases seeming to involve wealthy gay couples and single (male) westerners and poverty stricken Indian/Nepali women acting as surrogates…

edition.cnn.com/2015/05/02/world … index.html

npr.org/blogs/goatsandsoda/2 … hquake-day

972mag.com/israelis-surrogate-mo … er/106114/

Personally, I dont see how such a business arrangement between westerners and illiterates from the sub-continent can ever be deemed to be fully legitimate, especially given the involvement of the usual hordes of predatory gangsters and middle-men that surface whenever euros or dollars are on offer in that part of the world.

Nontheless, these women do ultimately decide to get involved in this practice of their own volition (Ive never heard of anyone being trafficked into it). However, much like prostitution, when we get beyond the philosophising in and around the topic, actual experience of the conditions on the ground can be enough to make one decidedly uncomfortable about the process…

The best warrior!

Only the mother can answer that.

Is the solution to cut the baby in half ?

Surrogacy limited in Israel so some customers have to go abroad.
dailymail.co.uk/news/article … quake.html

Planned legislation for Ireland
health.gov.ie/blog/press-release … -research/

How about the government work to improve fertility by improving social and lifestyle factors rather than facilitating surrogacy?

I think you misunderstand the purpose of the legislation. Surrogacy is now completely legal. Any legislation will make it more difficult to access, not easier (and that may well be a good thing).

I’m not sure I fully agree, surrogacy at the moment is not recognised and as such the birth mother will always be the birth mother. The FCRA confirm that the birth mother remains the birth mother but the genetic father is no longer always the automatic second parent. I’m not sure this is a direction I am completely comfortable with even though the changes are happening in small steps.
thejournal.ie/surrogacy-in-i … 8-May2015/

Yes but who knows what the new legislation will say. As long as one parent is genetically the parent, the couple currently has some rights anyway. A big thing is the separation of commercial and non-commercial surrogacy. It’s a big quagmire, but regulation really shouldn’t be controversial here I would hope(!).