# Would you ever consider being a surrogate?



## xnwife (Jan 15, 2007)

I followed the advertised link at the bottom of the screen to a site for surrogates and it kind of peaked my interest. I know that I would definitely be a surrogate for my sister if she ever needed me to be, but so far that is not an issue. I had such a beautiful pregnancy and delivery with Ethan that I would consider doing it for a couple who wanted a baby, but I think only if I knew them.
Anyway, I just thought that I would bring it up. I am interested to hear how you all feel about it. And I would love to hear from those of you who have done it.


----------



## KsMum (Nov 1, 2006)

If they needed to use my eggs, then for my sister only, using someone elses eggs, then also for friends. Not for a stranger.


----------



## chinaKat (Aug 6, 2005)

No way. Pretty much the only thing that keeps me going through pregnancy is the fact that I get my very own baby at the end.









Even if somebody extremely close to me wanted a baby, I am quite sure that I wouldn't do it.

That's just me, though -- I admire women who do it. I'm jealous, too -- they must enjoy pregnancy a LOT more than I do.


----------



## mommy68 (Mar 13, 2006)

I liked being pregnant each time but in no way do I want to be the mother of a newborn baby again so I could do it.

I could only do it if the man's sperm and her eggs are put together inside me. I wouldn't want to carry my own child and then give it up in the end, no way. I'd have no problem carrying someone else's child for them. In fact I'd be honored to help in that way.


----------



## PGNPORTLAND (Jul 9, 2005)

I could never do it. I could never give away a child that came out of my body no matter whose eggs and sperm it was. That said, I think it's a wonderful, selfless, giving thing to do for those who can.


----------



## Jessy1019 (Aug 6, 2006)

I have, and would happily do it using the intended parents' eggs and sperm. If I hadn't had two c-sections, I would probably be a terrific candidate for surrogacy.


----------



## RedWine (Sep 26, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PGNPORTLAND* 
I could never do it. I could never give away a child that came out of my body no matter whose eggs and sperm it was. That said, I think it's a wonderful, selfless, giving thing to do for those who can.


Well put, my feelings exactly.


----------



## littlemizflava (Oct 8, 2006)

i could do it in a heart beat knowing how my aunt and uncle tried to have a baby and ended up going on a waiting list to adopt and waited 13 years to get a baby so i really feel the pain they went threw but i couldnt do it because i have struggled to have the 2 i have and i want more


----------



## Patchfire (Dec 11, 2001)

I would do it with other eggs than my own, for friends. I don't think I could contract out with someone I never met before that!


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

no. it kinda squicks me out, couldnt do it.

nak


----------



## phathui5 (Jan 8, 2002)

Nope. What gets me through all the yuck involved in pregnancy and birth is the idea of having another kid in the house. I wouldn't be able to go through pregnancy and give the baby to someone to raise. I considered it in the past (egg donation too) and realized it's not something I'm willing to do.


----------



## Daisie125 (Oct 26, 2005)

I would love to. Unfortunatly it is illegal in my state.


----------



## BelgianSheepDog (Mar 31, 2006)

No and I have serious qualms as to whether it should even be an option.


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

No way. I couldn't do it whether it was my egg or someone elses. I couldn't do it for a relative, friend, or stranger. I LOVED being pregnant and feeling so connected to that growing little life inside me. I just could not imagine going through a pregnancy and then giving the baby to someone else. I briefly toyed with the idea of egg donation when I was seriously broke in college, but quickly realized there was no way I could do it.


----------



## Nicole77 (Oct 20, 2003)

I know that I couldn't do it. That said, I have a lot of respect for the women who do and I agree that it is a wonderful and selfless thing to do for another.


----------



## crazyeight (Mar 29, 2006)

my 2 cents is that i want to be a surro...not sure when or for whom or what or anything but i was always interested since i knew about THE DEED and such. not sure whether i could do it with my own egg but i also don't want all the hormones of GS or the mutliple pg thing.


----------



## marlee (Aug 29, 2005)

No. I have too many emotional reasons, had a pregnancy which includes morning sickness, bedrest, and more bedrest. Then a life threatening delivery







And a long recovery from that.

I would donate extra eggs and or embroy's though.


----------



## flyingspaghettimama (Dec 18, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chinaKat* 
No way. Pretty much the only thing that keeps me going through pregnancy is the fact that I get my very own baby at the end.









Even if somebody extremely close to me wanted a baby, I am quite sure that I wouldn't do it.

That's just me, though -- I admire women who do it. I'm jealous, too -- they must enjoy pregnancy a LOT more than I do.









Oh great. CK already typed up my post so I don't have to. Thanks, CK!


----------



## KayasMama04 (Feb 4, 2006)

Yes I would if it was for like my best friend or a sister. I had the worst morning sickness in the world by for my friend to have the joy I do with dd id do it in a heart beat. I perfer being done having my own kids but thats a techniqality.


----------



## moppity (Aug 15, 2005)

Yes, but only for my sister and her husband. Call me selfish, but if I am going to carry the baby, I want to be involved in its life which I know I would be if it was my biological neice/nephew.


----------



## Cutie Patootie (Feb 29, 2004)

I would happily grow a baby for my "respected" family or friends with their eggs and sperm.







I could never do it using my own eggs or for a stranger.


----------



## RockStarMom (Sep 11, 2005)

I might, but never with my own egg, and the parents would have to be hardcore AP.


----------



## kewb (May 13, 2005)

I would do it for my sister but not for anyone else.


----------



## Mylie (Mar 15, 2004)

1)...It was their egg and sperm...I couldn't give my own baby away.

2)They were good people.

3)They wouldn't mind me being a family friend after the birth.


----------



## chrissy (Jun 5, 2002)

i could never do it. my pregnancies aren't horrible, but they aren't blissful either. mostly though, i just know that i would never be okay with not parenting a baby after carrying it for nine months (no matter whose eggs and sperm it was).

also, i don't think surrogacy should be banned, but i do have some personal, ethical concerns with it.

i would donate my eggs to my sister or a close friend, if i felt sure that the baby would be raised with in a loving home (my definition, of course).


----------



## beckyand3littlemonsters (Sep 16, 2006)

*I'd love to be able to say yes, but no i don't think i could , if my sister couldn't have babies of her own then i would think about doing it for her but thats it no one else, i was wanting to do it for friends of my dad who are haveing trouble concvieving but when i really thought about it deep down i knew i just couldn't, as soon as i see those little lines i'm thinking about my baby and how i can't wait to see him/her, the bond is there long before birth, so theres no way i could just hand over the baby after birth*


----------



## newmommy (Sep 15, 2003)

No, I would not.


----------



## Getz (May 22, 2005)

I could be a gestational surrogate for a close friend or family member. I could never give away my eggs.

I would talk extensively with them about their parenting views before agreeing to it. For example, I would never carry a child if I knew he would be circumcized.


----------



## Starr (Mar 16, 2005)

Just something to think about but I have twin sisters. One has children and the other like myself has fertility issues. My sister told her that if she ever wanted her to she would be a surrogate for her, this was like 10 years ago. Since then I also have been unable to get pregnant. Right now my sister is due in April with my other sisters baby, more like an open adoption. But I still feel like the sister being a surrogate feels bad that she is carrying a child for my sister and not one for me. At the time they made the deal I was still quite young and never really thought that far in advance. After this pregnancy my sister is getting her tubes tied.

That said if it were someone elses eggs and sperm I could do it. I would htink of myself more like the incubator. If it were my eggs I would consider it to be more like an open adoption.


----------



## Ellien C (Aug 19, 2004)

Yep - We tried to harvest my eggs for my sister, but it didn't work. She ended up getting pregnant naturally a few years later.

And I just recently offered the idea of talking about my carrying a baby for a friend of mine. I don't know if we'd do it, but I said it was something we could talk about if that turned out to be the problem. They really want a baby and I really want them to have one.


----------



## becoming (Apr 11, 2003)

I couldn't. I would grow way too attached to a baby living inside me for that long and especially after delivering and seeing/holding the baby. No way I could give him/her up.


----------



## Shirelle (May 22, 2006)

Never. I have real moral issues with the whole process, and would be way too attached to the baby growing inside of me. Too much playing God for me.


----------



## Jilian (Jun 16, 2003)

I could only do it for a relative or a very close friend. Infertility is awful and if I could save someone I loved from it, then I would. That being said, I would not be ok with using my own eggs.

I'm sure I would still bond with the child while I was carrying him/her and the postpartum period would probably be hard too but the end result would be worth it to me.


----------



## lifescholar (Nov 26, 2006)

I couldn't do it. I would be too connected to the baby to ever let it go.

But, I totally support women who CAN do it!


----------



## pjs (Mar 30, 2005)

Nope, never.


----------



## JustJamie (Apr 24, 2006)

I used to want to. Then I ended up with a difficult first pregnancy, not sure if I could go through it again without being able to keep the baby as my own at the end of the ride.

I may reconsider if I have a healthier 2nd pregnancy.


----------



## cjanelles (Oct 22, 2005)

I would have...in my 20's.

But probably not now...this pregnancy (at 32) is a lot more uncomfortable and difficult than my previous pregnancies in my early 20's...and doing so would cause a drain on my resourcefulness to my own family, so that's the only reason I wouldn't.


----------



## Mommiska (Jan 3, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Cutie Patootie* 
I would happily grow a baby for my "respected" family or friends with their eggs and sperm.







I could never do it using my own eggs or for a stranger.

Ditto that exactly. Could never do it with my own eggs (couldn't even donate eggs, although it makes me sad I feel that way, as I know what joy it could bring to another couple...but I just couldn't know that I had a biological child growing up somewhere that I had not contact with.

That's why it would have to be close family or friends - if I'd carried the baby (even though it wasn't biologically mine), I'd want to be involved in its life.

And I could ONLY do it if the prospective parents agreed in writing that they would not circ if it was a boy (not an issue here in the UK, but if I was a surrogate for family/friends in the States...no WAY could I carry a baby and then hand him over for someone to cut off part of his body without his consent).

Reading through some of the other comments - I understand people saying they couldn't, because they get so attached to the baby they are carrying. I think I could do this because we are finished with our own family, and I have no desire to be the mother of a newborn again.

I really think that should be a pre-requisite for surrogacy - that the surrogate mom is finished having her own family. It would be very difficult otherwise, I think (even more than it would be otherwise).


----------



## mackysmama (Jan 11, 2005)

This is an interesting discussion. Both of my children were conceived using an anoymous sperm donor and we are grateful to this unknown man every second. Though, honestly, we don't think of him or his sperm very often. Are kids are just our kids. I would want to give the same gift to someone. I would donated my eggs because, for me, it's just giving someone a part they're missing or some DNA that they need. I would have a harder time being a surrogate, though I would do it for a friend or family member in need. It would be hard for me because, although I am done having children, I still think about having a 3rd and I get woosy and dreamy when I think about holding another newly birthed baby. But this is all for nothing because I'm considered too old to be an egg donor.

I am curious if those who aren't comfortable with the idea of donating eggs feel the same about donated sperm. It seems many people think differently about sperm. What about an anoymous versus known donor?


----------



## bohemama (Jan 29, 2005)

Yep, considered it and have done it. Twice. It was one of the most fulfilling things I have ever done. I would do it again, but the both times I did it I had twins and I don't think I could do that again. I'm also getting older and would like to have one more baby of my own. That and having 6 babies in six years has taken a bigger toll on my body than I expected!

Both couples were not people I knew before hand. We used the mother's eggs in both cases. The first couple I don't have much contact with, but the second live about 30 minutes away and I see them whenever I want (which isn't much, I'm not very attached). I also nursed the second set of twins for two weeks and pumped for 13.


----------



## Phoenix_Rising (Jun 27, 2005)

I would do it in a heartbeat for a friend or family member. I would have to do some soul searching before even looking into doing it for someone I did not know.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Daisie125* 
I would love to. Unfortunatly it is illegal in my state.

Just curious as to where it is illegal. . .

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BelgianSheepDog* 
No and I have serious qualms as to whether it should even be an option.

Out of curiousity, why? Is it the idea of finding homes for children who *already* exist and do not have homes and loving families? Again, just curious. Not wanting to start any debates here.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

No, because I have a bad uterus and its a miracle I have the biological children I do have. However we did consider a surrogate. My sister was more than willing to have a baby for us but we decided it would not be a good idea because she gets pre-e and has lupus, but she was willing to take risks for us. We decided to adopt instead. Since then we have had two more bio kids and I am pregnant right now.

However, if I had a good uterus, I would consider being a surrogate for J & G our gay friends. However they tell me that they are happy just to spoil our kids and give them back when they misbehave.


----------



## Haydee (Jan 10, 2006)

I would love to be a surrogate, I'm seriously considering it right now. I think my DD needs to be a bit more mentally stable before I can though.


----------



## BelgianSheepDog (Mar 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Susannah M* 

Out of curiousity, why? Is it the idea of finding homes for children who *already* exist and do not have homes and loving families? Again, just curious. Not wanting to start any debates here.

There are several issues IMHO...

I think that surrogacy has the potential to be exploitive and in fact is, at times, exploitive in a way that sperm donation and adoption are not.

I think that women are socialized and pressured to "give of themselves" to such an extent in this society that it is difficult for a woman to give true free consent to surrogacy, with all the risks it entails. Just look at how surrogacy is valorized in discussions at MDC as somehow being more selfless than motherhood itself.

I think that while paying for sperm or an egg is OK, and paying a lawyer to be sure an adoption is done legally and equitably is OK, paying a woman for the use of her body is not OK.

I think there is class, race, and gender bias intwined in the practice of surrogacy to such an extent they are inseparable.

I think we need to stop our race forward with reproductive technology and put some real effort into refining the ethics.

I think that given the current social climate and trends it's not too hard to imagine there might come a time when it is commonplace for elite women to pay poor women to take on the physical discomforts and risks of pregnancy and birth for them. Such a situation could never be equitable, by definition. I know of many isolated cases of such inequality now; given the trend towards the rich getting richer, the poor getting poorer, and elite women delaying childbearing to the brink of menopause and beyond, I don't think this scenario becoming common is farfetched at all.


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

NAK - GREAT POST, BSD! oops caps lock!


----------



## PiePie (Oct 2, 2006)

hell, no! i am horribly sick (nauseated) with #1; DH wants to adopt #2!


----------



## wife&mommy (May 26, 2005)

No, I wouldn't. Sometimes I think I could but then I just think that I wouldn't want to have the risks involved with it when its not for my family. Selfish, yes, but I'm just being honest.


----------



## izzysmama (Aug 12, 2006)

I would love to be pregnant again....but no - I wouldn't be able to hand the baby over.


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

I have some rich lesbian friends who have these rich gay male friends who are looking for a surrogate, and they sent around an email asking if anyone would be interested. While these guys seem nice enough and I feel for them that they don't have a child, I just feel really yucky about it. I have big problems with adoption also, in that it is often a mama in poverty coerced into relinquishing her child to a wealthy couple. Yk? And our access to abortion is always under threat. Surrogacy in this societal context really feels like Rent-A-Uterus to me.


----------



## Phoenix_Rising (Jun 27, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BelgianSheepDog* 
There are several issues IMHO...

I think that surrogacy has the potential to be exploitive and in fact is, at times, exploitive in a way that sperm donation and adoption are not.

I think that women are socialized and pressured to "give of themselves" to such an extent in this society that it is difficult for a woman to give true free consent to surrogacy, with all the risks it entails. Just look at how surrogacy is valorized in discussions at MDC as somehow being more selfless than motherhood itself.

I think that while paying for sperm or an egg is OK, and paying a lawyer to be sure an adoption is done legally and equitably is OK, paying a woman for the use of her body is not OK.

I think there is class, race, and gender bias intwined in the practice of surrogacy to such an extent they are inseparable.

I think we need to stop our race forward with reproductive technology and put some real effort into refining the ethics.

I think that given the current social climate and trends it's not too hard to imagine there might come a time when it is commonplace for elite women to pay poor women to take on the physical discomforts and risks of pregnancy and birth for them. Such a situation could never be equitable, by definition. I know of many isolated cases of such inequality now; given the trend towards the rich getting richer, the poor getting poorer, and elite women delaying childbearing to the brink of menopause and beyond, I don't think this scenario becoming common is farfetched at all.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *thismama* 
I have some rich lesbian friends who have these rich gay male friends who are looking for a surrogate, and they sent around an email asking if anyone would be interested. While these guys seem nice enough and I feel for them that they don't have a child, I just feel really yucky about it. I have big problems with adoption also, in that it is often a mama in poverty coerced into relinquishing her child to a wealthy couple. Yk? And our access to abortion is always under threat. Surrogacy in this societal context really feels like Rent-A-Uterus to me.


What if the person/s for whom the woman was carrying the child was/were not paying anything (but medical expenses)? Curious to see if it still has the same feel for you ladies. Again, I am not trying to start any debates here!


----------



## treemom2 (Oct 1, 2003)

No, I wouldn't do it and honestly, I don't think it should be an option







:


----------



## Tigeresse (Nov 19, 2001)

Nope, wouldn't do it and agree w/many pp's misgivings about it. I'm too old anyway!


----------



## SneakyPie (Jan 13, 2002)

No, I would not do it. Partly for all the reasons already mentioned, but *mostly* because -- well, I don't think a baby wants to be handed over either. When a woman says "I just never thought of the baby as mine -- I was so happy to do this for the couple!" I can't help thinking of the little baby, all 9 months inside thinking she's with her mother (but feeling some disconnect?), and then maybe even being nursed by her mother, and then going to -- someone else! Whaaa?

Yeah, I guess I have big ethical issues with this. I mean infertility is the most unjust disease of all, and it's not right to ask all infertile people to "just adopt" (as if that were easy, or the right solution for everyone!), and yet I just can't get behind this solution either, at all.

Wow it's hard to talk about this without sounding judgy, isn't it?


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SneakyPie* 
No, I would not do it. Partly for all the reasons already mentioned, but *mostly* because -- well, I don't think a baby wants to be handed over either. When a woman says "I just never thought of the baby as mine -- I was so happy to do this for the couple!" I can't help thinking of the little baby, all 9 months inside thinking she's with her mother (but feeling some disconnect?), and then maybe even being nursed by her mother, and then going to -- someone else! Whaaa?

Oh gosh, this made me almost cry. I never thought of it from the baby's perspective before.


----------



## Paddington (Aug 25, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PGNPORTLAND* 
I could never do it. I could never give away a child that came out of my body no matter whose eggs and sperm it was. That said, I think it's a wonderful, selfless, giving thing to do for those who can.









: And also, Belgiansheepdog has a wonderful point about the ethics. In a lot of ways a child could have some of the same issues that adopted children have of why did my mother give me a way and with some sperm or egg donation being anonymous I think it may actually become an issue of where to draw the line on siblings (in cases where men donate repeatedly to a bank and the children all live in the same area). It really is a tough, tough question and situation.


----------



## Starr (Mar 16, 2005)

I have a quick question, not trying to hijack or start a debate, but for those of you who feel you couldn't and that its too much like "playing God" do you also have the same view towards infertility treatments like IVF? Just curious.


----------



## mackysmama (Jan 11, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Paddington* 
(in cases where men donate repeatedly to a bank and the children all live in the same area). .

All reputable sperm banks put a limit on how many births a donor can be responsible for as well as putting strict geographical limits on it. For example, my children's donor could have up to 10 children but once a child is born in Houston, TX, no more can be. But, thankfully, my children are the only children of the donor and he no longer gives.


----------



## Snowdrift (Oct 15, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BelgianSheepDog* 
No and I have serious qualms as to whether it should even be an option.









:


----------



## twin monkeys (Mar 8, 2006)

Yes I would do it I loved being prego had the best time with it was hardly sick at all.Even with twins it was so great I felt great gained some great weight that I needed to gain. And I do have family that had to adopt due gay couple if I could have carried a baby for them knowing it would complete their family I would in a heartbeat. So many people strugle with wanting a family and some states do have restrictions so if I could help them out I would


----------



## woobysma (Apr 20, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *moppity* 
Yes, but only for my sister and her husband. Call me selfish, but if I am going to carry the baby, I want to be involved in its life which I know I would be if it was my biological neice/nephew.

That's me, too. And, truthfully, I'd only do it for my middle sister, not my youngest








I'd have to feel _very_ strongly that the child would be well taken care of and would be part of my life forever. Even if it wasn't my bio-child, I'd feel an incredible amount of responsibility for him/her, even after birth.


----------



## treemom2 (Oct 1, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Starr* 
I have a quick question, not trying to hijack or start a debate, but for those of you who feel you couldn't and that its too much like "playing God" do you also have the same view towards infertility treatments like IVF? Just curious.

Not that I think either are "Playing God", but I do have ethical problems with both things.







:


----------



## Laggie (Nov 2, 2005)

I have seriously considered doing this for friends who have been unable to have a child (and who have been scammed twice in their quest to adopt.) Ultimately I think it's fear of what my family would think that holds me back.

For those that have issues with it - I don't see how it is any different than adoption. Are you also against adoption? I know some people ARE, and I know adopted kids often have issues, but I still think it's better than having kids be raised by a parent who doesn't feel able to care for them.


----------



## guest9921 (Nov 3, 2005)

Yes.

If any of my brothers were gay - or my SIL was infertile, I would.

As many PP have said - I would need to be involved in the childs life to KNOW that it was well taken care of.
Bringing a child into the world (even if it is not genetically 'yours') requires a responsibility for that child.

Also - said person (unless it was my brother, and then I would donate the milk) would have to induce lactation and try to build that bond and health. (I would donate whatever I needed to for the first few years.)
Person would have to agree to no CIO, no circing, no aborting of multiple fetuses, and hopefully cosleeping.
Gentle disclipline as well.

Woo. Thinking about this too much.


----------



## treemom2 (Oct 1, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Laggie* 
For those that have issues with it - I don't see how it is any different than adoption. Are you also against adoption? I know some people ARE, and I know adopted kids often have issues, but I still think it's better than having kids be raised by a parent who doesn't feel able to care for them.

I have no problem with adoption. However I do wish it wasn't so expensive and so many people weren't taken advantage of in the process. I also feel that it is sad that babies of different ethinicities are different "prices". I also wish more people were willing to take a chance on older children rather than only wanting the babies. I realize that a lot of times older children have some issues, but they are still in need of loving homes and families (I used to work in a shelter, as a case worker, for abused and runaway teens--well, age 9 and up--it was a short term shelter and it was so sad that often our children would have to go to "child jail" because they had outlasted their time and no one was interested in adopting an older child).


----------



## chrissy (Jun 5, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Laggie* 
For those that have issues with it - I don't see how it is any different than adoption. Are you also against adoption? I know some people ARE, and I know adopted kids often have issues, but I still think it's better than having kids be raised by a parent who doesn't feel able to care for them.

I have zero issues with adoption, and, in fact, the reason that i have issues with surrogacy is the fact that there are so many children in this world without permanent homes.

I don't really have issues with IVF, although I probably wouldn't do it myself. BUT, I have been lucky enough to not have had to make that decision.

I do think that women who are surrogates must be some of the most loving, giving people around and I certainly have nothing but positive thoughts for them.


----------



## miss_sonja (Jun 15, 2003)

Absolutely NOT. I hate being pregnant, would only do it if I wanted another child. I have a lot of empathy for infertile couples, but I ain't doin' it. All the money in the world would not be enough to carry a baby I couldn't keep.


----------



## Spinifex (Oct 5, 2006)

I would, but only for my brother's wife. Maybe my sisters-in-law, and only if they requested it.

There's a pretty good blogroll at http://www.alittlepregnant.com with surrogacy stories, if you're interested in learning more.


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Susannah M* 
What if the person/s for whom the woman was carrying the child was/were not paying anything (but medical expenses)? Curious to see if it still has the same feel for you ladies. Again, I am not trying to start any debates here!

Yes, then I probably have even more issues.







Unless it's a close friend or a sister, but otherwise I'm very uncomfortable with surrogacy.


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Laggie* 
For those that have issues with it - I don't see how it is any different than adoption. Are you also against adoption?

I have huge, giant issues with adoption in its current form. I feel that too often women are coerced or shamed into giving up their children, forced by poverty, which would be much less of an issue if we had a decent social safety net. I feel that biological mamas and babies have a fundamental right to be together, and the culture needs to make certain that can happen.

If a bio-mama wants to give her child up for adoption, not becoz the other choices suck so badly and are scary, then I'm all for it.

And don't even get me started on people from wealthy nations adoption the children of those is less wealthy nations... oy.


----------



## ~Megan~ (Nov 7, 2002)

No way. Its a huge process, painful for many women, and simply not something I could commit to doing.

While I can sort of understand the heartbreak that these families face (since I've never been there I have to guess based on my own fertility struggles) I couldn't do it.

I know its a personal decision but I'm not sure why people choose surrogacy over adoption.

*trying to say this as best I can without meaning to offend or upset anyone. But if I have please forgive me and help me to understand so I can correct it*


----------



## guestmama9915 (Jul 29, 2004)

I would love to help people out by being a surrogate, but I also hate being pregnant. Absolutely hate it. I've thought about it before, but I really just wouldn't enjoy it and there's sooo much responsibility.


----------



## PrennaMama (Oct 10, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *littlemizflava* 
i could do it in a heart beat knowing how my aunt and uncle tried to have a baby and ended up going on a waiting list to adopt and waited 13 years to get a baby so i really feel the pain they went threw but i couldnt do it because i have struggled to have the 2 i have and i want more

My aunt & uncle, too, struggled, eventually adopted... had three still born, and 5 miscarriages.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *RockStarMom* 
I might, but never with my own egg, and the parents would have to be hardcore AP.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mylie* 
1)...It was their egg and sperm...I couldn't give my own baby away.

2)They were good people.

3)They wouldn't mind me being a family friend after the birth.









: I feel the empathy and want to help, and maybe that's part of social conditioning... but it feels more like a sincere desire to Mother Many... if that makes sense... not that I want to mother the surro _baby_, but rather, lovingly desire that others be allowed to mother. (My best friend calls it my "come to the boob" approach to the world...)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mackysmama* 
This is an interesting discussion. Both of my children were conceived using an anoymous sperm donor and we are grateful to this unknown man every second. Though, honestly, we don't think of him or his sperm very often. Are kids are just our kids. I would want to give the same gift to someone. I would donated my eggs because, for me, it's just giving someone a part they're missing or some DNA that they need. I would have a harder time being a surrogate, though I would do it for a friend or family member in need. It would be hard for me because, although I am done having children, I still think about having a 3rd and I get woosy and dreamy when I think about holding another newly birthed baby. But this is all for nothing because I'm considered too old to be an egg donor.

I am curious if those who aren't comfortable with the idea of donating eggs feel the same about donated sperm. It seems many people think differently about sperm. What about an anoymous versus known donor?

As a product of arteficial insemination, I feel ya!! I'd give back to the world, in the way I was given _to_ the world...

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thismama* 
I have huge, giant issues with adoption in its current form. I feel that too often women are coerced or shamed into giving up their children, forced by poverty, which would be much less of an issue if we had a decent social safety net. I feel that biological mamas and babies have a fundamental right to be together, and the culture needs to make certain that can happen.

If a bio-mama wants to give her child up for adoption, not becoz the other choices suck so badly and are scary, then I'm all for it.

And don't even get me started on people from wealthy nations adoption the children of those is less wealthy nations... oy.

This just made me really sad. Dh is an adopted kid, from Cambodia; his bio-mom's family was being marched out of Phnom Phen, with the rest of their village, during the Vietnam War; they were all afraid for their lives, and many of them died. His birth cert was written on scratch paper in pencil, and all the kids that were rescued that day were given the same birthday, regardless of what day they were born. His older brother is Vietnamese, he was born to a woman who was prostituting herself to GI's. She left him in a trash can. My favorite student EVER when I was teaching, was a little boy from China... he was left in a poverty stricken Chinese orphanage because an amneotic band had severed one of his legs below the knee; thus his family likely deemed him worthless; along with the hundreds of little girls that were there.

Anyway, I digress. I think I'd do the surrogate route; dh would be heartily against it... and fwiw, he also has misgivings re; adoption, since one of his adopted brothers (this one American) was born to a woman who used drugs throughout her pregnancy, and as he developed, it became obvious, and now their family does not know what to do about him after all the therapy and medication in the world.


----------



## BelgianSheepDog (Mar 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thismama* 
I have huge, giant issues with adoption in its current form. I feel that too often women are coerced or shamed into giving up their children, forced by poverty, which would be much less of an issue if we had a decent social safety net. I feel that biological mamas and babies have a fundamental right to be together, and the culture needs to make certain that can happen.

If a bio-mama wants to give her child up for adoption, not becoz the other choices suck so badly and are scary, then I'm all for it.

And don't even get me started on people from wealthy nations adoption the children of those is less wealthy nations... oy.









:

Though re: the last paragraph, I think sometimes that can be almost as bad even domestically. I've had a couple acquaintances (who were white and quite well-off) adopt via private adoption the children of poor minority women. While I put on a happy face for these folks and congratulate them, it makes me seriously uncomfortable and sad thinking about women in such a place that they feel they have to give up their child to people from the dominant culture...ack, you know what I mean, right?

And online and irl I have witnessed some "rants" from white, well-off women who want to adopt or have a surrogate carry their child that just really, really turn me off and appall me. I've personally been on the receiving end of "why did someone like YOU get to have a baby when *I* can't?" Because you know I'm so horribly undeserving of my child, and they deserve her! Argh, talk about triggering a mama bear response!


----------



## Aliviasmom (Jul 24, 2006)

NO! A) I very strongly dislike being pregnant. B) It was hard enough to place my son for adoption. I just don't think I could go through it all again.


----------



## Demeter9 (Nov 14, 2006)

I thought about it. Before I had a baby. Pregnancy is too hard on me for me to do it for anything but the most personal and dire reasons.

I'd do it for my step-mom, or my sister if they needed it.

I do know of a family where their mother carried their baby (DD's egg and her DD's husband sperm). She had some serious issues afterwards. Post-partum. Anxiety over losing "her" baby. Etc. It was very hard on her. And her DD adopted their next baby - I imagine largely because it was just too huge to do again. To have that sort of stress in the family, and to even ask her mother go through that terrible wound again.

I might donate an egg. I would have been FAR more likely to do so before having children though. And I have straight out forbidden my husband to donate sperm. All his babies are MINE. I don't care how insane that sounds.







If he needs to fertilize more, I'll go get this tubal ligation I just had undone!


----------



## Leta (Dec 6, 2006)

I would not. I do not like being pregnant, so in all likelihood I would not do it even for someone I knew well.

A friend of mine lost an ovary during her first pregnancy, and had already lost the tube on the other side, so the only way she'll have another biological child is thru surrogacy. Her sister has offered to do it, should they proceed. I'm okay with that, because the sister would know and love the child, and would be doing it as an act of love and kindness.

But the whole idea of paid surrogacy between strangers squicks me out. I see the line between that and buying a black market baby as thin indeed.

On the other hand, I would donate eggs. Honestly, I would do that for free. I would donate embryos, too, if I had IVF or anything.

I agree that a baby carried by a surrogate, genetic relations or not, probably thinks of the surrogate as mommy, and from the baby's end of things it is no different from adoption.

If I was infertile, I doubt I would do IVF. I would, however, carry a child that was genetically unrelated to me, through donor eggs or embryos. I think that a genetic bond can be tenuous often times. On the other hand, carrying a baby under your heart for a year... that bond is undeniable, at least to me.

I also am troubled by the ethics -or should I say lack of ethics- surrounding both the infertility and adoption industries. It seems to me that people often are exploited, emotionally, financially, physically, etc.


----------



## Mama Dragon (Dec 5, 2005)

NAK....

I was actually going to do a surrogacy, just getting started with a company, then got pg with #4 and had a hard pg. Awsome UC birth. The combo of hard pg and knowing thr IP's would [robably want me to birth in a hospital (either one makes me say no, toether its an adamant NO), just changed it all. I guess it wasn't meant to be.


----------



## LoveBeads (Jul 8, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamao'two* 
I know its a personal decision but I'm not sure why people choose surrogacy over adoption.

*trying to say this as best I can without meaning to offend or upset anyone. But if I have please forgive me and help me to understand so I can correct it*

My best friend lost one tube in an ectopic, remaining tube is prone to twisting, and has a bicornuate uterus. She had nine rounds of IVF and they were all unsuccessful. 7 of them resulted in miscarriage. She had 11 frozen embryos when she decided that she couldn't do it anymore.

She decided to adopt. She had 6 failed matches in 8 years time.

At this point, she had been trying to have a baby for 16 (yes, 16!) years. She decided to give up.

But her DH wanted to try just one more time. They decided to hire a surrogate and see if any of the 11 embryos would survive the thaw and could be implanted. Mind you, the embryos were 8 years old at this point.

Four survived the thaw and 2 implanted - she has healthy twins.


----------



## PrennaMama (Oct 10, 2005)

Wow what a great story!


----------



## Starr (Mar 16, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thismama* 
I have huge, giant issues with adoption in its current form. I feel that too often women are coerced or shamed into giving up their children, forced by poverty, which would be much less of an issue if we had a decent social safety net. I feel that biological mamas and babies have a fundamental right to be together, and the culture needs to make certain that can happen.

If a bio-mama wants to give her child up for adoption, not becoz the other choices suck so badly and are scary, then I'm all for it.

And don't even get me started on people from wealthy nations adoption the children of those is less wealthy nations... oy.

I'm really sorry you feel this way as I AM one of those people from a wealthy nation adopting a child from a less wealthy nation







: It is things like these that make me want to leave here...


----------



## Zach'smom (Nov 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BelgianSheepDog* 







:And online and irl I have witnessed some "rants" from white, well-off women who want to adopt or have a surrogate carry their child that just really, really turn me off and appall me. I've personally been on the receiving end of "why did someone like YOU get to have a baby when *I* can't?" Because you know I'm so horribly undeserving of my child, and they deserve her! Argh, talk about triggering a mama bear response!


I am one of those well-off white women that have ranted "Why can you have a baby and I can't" . It is not that we are horrible, evil people. I was just so desperate to have a baby. For over 6 years that is what my life revolved around. I remember feeling so horribly jealous of women who could have children. I thought it was so hiddeously unfair that a teenage girl who didn't want a baby, couldn't afford to feed or clothe the baby and didn't have any kind of support could have a baby, but I couldn't. Here I was married and able to care for a baby and had a great support system, etc, etc., but I couldn't have a baby. I didn't thnk anyone was undeserving of a child. I just wanted to know why I didn't deserve a child.

all I am saying is that those statements are coming from desperate women who are in the middle of their own personal hell. They are not trying to hurt anyone. They are just trying to make sense of their own situation. I wouldn't take it personally. I hope this makes sense.

I would definately be a surrogate!!!!!


----------



## Sharlla (Jul 14, 2005)

Nope, I don't ever want to be PG again.


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Zach'smom* 

all I am saying is that those statements are coming from desperate women who are in the middle of their own personal hell. They are not trying to hurt anyone. They are just trying to make sense of their own situation. I wouldn't take it personally. I hope this makes sense.

I would definately be a surrogate!!!!!

I understand it at least a little bit becoz I thought I wouldn't be able to have children, and I remember the jealousy and sometimes hate I would feel for people who were pg or had babies. It's hard.

What sucks IMO is that the very valid and understandable feeling of jealousy gets mixed in with these culturally supported notions about who is 'deserving' and 'undeserving' of having children. And then this gets institutionalized in the form of coerced adoptions and lack of support for single mothers which creates very adversarial or even impossible conditions for not so privileged bio-mothers who want to keep our children. After all, there is a 'deserving' and 'better' family waiting for them, whose only fault was that they could not conceive naturally.

Make sense? Not to negate your feelings at all, but I worry about how this goes down in the culture.

On another note, I think teenage girls get pg unintentionally so frequently becoz that is the most biologically fertile time. In our culture we offput conceiving children in favour of 'waiting for stability,' but with that stability comes age and more frequent infertility. We have it backwards.


----------



## BelgianSheepDog (Mar 31, 2006)

Yeah. Pretty much.

FTR although I look 15, I'm 26. Which is still "babies having babies" to some women in their 40s, I found out. And although I wear mostly second hand clothes and I take the bus or walk everywhere, her birth was covered by two insurance plans. So just because someone looks young and flaky doesn't mean they're not able to provide for the baby.


----------



## L&IsMama (Jan 24, 2006)

No. I couldn't do it.


----------



## 59046 (Jun 24, 2006)

Truthfully- no. I am not healthy enough to go through a pregnancy for another couple. I definitely wouldn't do it if they needed my eggs, to me, that child would be MY child and I would feel like I was giving her/him up. I know this all might sound selfish, but it's really how I feel.


----------



## PrennaMama (Oct 10, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Starr* 
I'm really sorry you feel this way as I AM one of those people from a wealthy nation adopting a child from a less wealthy nation







: It is things like these that make me want to leave here...

Thank you! Me too.

Personally, I feel there is a naivette that surrounds many westerners' perceptions of international adoption, and rescue (yes, rescue... my dh feels as tho he was rescued...). The same naivette is played into how surrogacy, invetro fert., and artificial insemination are received in the western culture.

There _have_ been an unfortunate few cases where people used immoral methods (someone mentioned 'Black Market Babies') etc, but for the majority , the process is not one of malicious wealthy Americans swooping into poor, defenseless, underprivaledged countries and ripping suckling babes from the arms of their unwilling mothers. There are all _kindsa_ terrible circumstances involved these children's separation from their bio-moms... does anyone really think there is evil involved in lifting that child up out of those circumstances into the loving arms of another mother?


----------



## Ellp (Nov 18, 2004)

I have seriously considered it, and have discussed it with Dh. One of my friends from high school had to have a kidney transplant and is now on anti-rejection meds. If she were to get preggy, she'd have to get off them, and it would be potentially life threatening for her.

I considered doing a surrogacy for them, using their own eggs and sperm, but in the end, I just can't say I trust her Dh. He's younger than she is, and in many many ways, much more immature. They're living paycheck to paycheck, and her Dh "spluges" every so often, sending them backwards financially. I just can't see handing over a child that I helped to create over to a family who is on quicksand a lot of the time.

The other big one for me is that once I hand the child over, I would have no control over how they treat the child. It would just KILL me to ever hear of any mental or physical abuse. Funny thing is, if my friend were to separate from her Dh, and was willing to be a single parent, I'd be her surragate no problem!


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PrennaMama* 
does anyone really think there is evil involved in lifting that child up out of those circumstances into the loving arms of another mother?

I really do understand, and I don't intend to villianize western mothers who adopt children internationally. Individually I understand it can be a good thing for children. in many circumstances.

It's just the overview of it that I have a problem with. Many nations are desperately poor because of colonization, and because other nations (such as ours) hog more than their share of resources.

20% of the world's people have access to 80% of its resources, leaving 20% of the resources for the other 80% of the world's people. Does that seem fair to you?

So, in that context, many nations cannot afford to care for their children. And then people from the first world, wealthy nations, the colonizers, come in and take children via adoption. In doing so yes we ameliorate the living conditions of many children, but we also remove them from their extended family networks, their communities, their cultures.

I know mothers who have adopted their children internationally. They are good people who love their children, of course, as we all do. It's just the greater context of what is going on gets ignored, and I don't feel comfortable with that.


----------



## mommysusie (Oct 19, 2006)

No, I think surrogacy is selfish, esp when there are so many babies and children that need homes right here in our country.


----------



## LoveBeads (Jul 8, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mommysusie* 
No, I think surrogacy is selfish, esp when there are so many babies and children that need homes right here in our country.

By that logic it is selfish for any of us to want biological children.


----------



## eurobin (Aug 20, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PGNPORTLAND* 
I could never do it. I could never give away a child that came out of my body no matter whose eggs and sperm it was. That said, I think it's a wonderful, selfless, giving thing to do for those who can.

Well said. I loved being pregnant but I just couldn't go through a pregnancy without getting attached to the baby. And I couldn't give up a baby who I was attached to.


----------



## roadfamily6now (Sep 14, 2006)

I would.

In fact I have, 2 times now.


----------



## limabean (Aug 31, 2005)

No. It would break me to have to part with a baby I carried.


----------



## Suprakid1982 (Sep 17, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thismama* 
I have huge, giant issues with adoption in its current form. I feel that too often women are coerced or shamed into giving up their children, forced by poverty, which would be much less of an issue if we had a decent social safety net. I feel that biological mamas and babies have a fundamental right to be together, and the culture needs to make certain that can happen.

ITA


----------



## Ms.Doula (Apr 3, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *gsmama2* 
I also nursed the second set of twins for two weeks and pumped for 13.

WOW! How did this work? If you don't mind my asking that is? This intrigues me!







:

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mommysusie*
No, I think surrogacy is selfish, esp when there are so many babies and children that need homes right here in our country.

WOW!! Thats so judgemental! And thats coming from someone who is blessed with biological children herself, I presume? Why then did you not adopt? Would that have been less selfish of you?
OK Im not trying to be a bitch, but at least look at it from another angle would ya?

That all said..... I have been weighing this recently.
DH & I discussed this & decided I should NOT be a surro (mainly for health issues, difficuly PGs, 1 previous c-sect., but also for stress & family reasons)
After reading this thread though, I realise I also could not go through with it, unless it was someone close to me (a sister) and I could share in the responsibility & be a part of the child's 'village' so to speak.

We are however still concidering egg donations. I would LOVE to hear from those that have done this. Both with good stories or not so good.
Post or feel free to PM or Email me Please. Id be most appreciative!


----------



## Periwinkle (Feb 27, 2003)

Absolutely never. (But I don't think I want to get pg again for my own children either!)

But I agree with "it would break me to give up a baby I carried." I would see it as MY baby. I know I would be one of those horror stories you read about where I decide in the end that I need to keep the baby. I just.... I couldn't do it. I couldn't give the baby away.


----------



## Kundalini-Mama (Jul 15, 2002)

I'm just so glad my good friend is not reading this thread







:

Her son was born still this fall.

She never saw him open his eyes, she was never able to hold him to her aching breasts and see the way her delicious milk seemed to reach him all the way down to his toes as his eyes rolled back in absolute ecstasy as he grew and nursed on her perfect milk.

She never thought to look at his penis, the penis that would never be circ-ed, the penis that would never be retracted. Or his teeny bum that woke her from deep sleep so many times.

She was never able to put his lil' body in her new sling. The sling she picked out for him. To have him cradled and warm against her body as she read books to her 5 yr old who loved him oh so much.

She was never able to hear him cry. Never ever, and she will never hear it. And she missed out on snuggling in the bed w/her daughter and her son and feeling that there could be no more perfect feeling in all of the world!

Yet, she is *UA* selfish because when her son died, her uterus died too. She started hemorraging and almost died but she wanted to live for her husband and her daughter. Even though with the intense grief it would have been easier to let go, to die, she wanted to live. She wanted life.

But, let's all jump on the bandwagon and judge her. Obviously for her considering a surrogacy to bring her child into the world. A pregnancy that will bring up so much raw emotions and so much healing, we should judge her.

I wonder how many of you (w/quite a few kiddos in your sig, congratulations) would feel if this was your life. And not only could you never birth a baby, but people judged you for your choices.


----------



## Starr (Mar 16, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mommysusie* 
No, I think surrogacy is selfish, esp when there are so many babies and children that need homes right here in our country.

If thats the case I would be happy to give you info on starting the adoption process- domestically of course!


----------



## Silvercrest79 (Jan 20, 2004)

I considered it at one time but the more I thought about it, read about it, and talked about it, the more I realized how TOTALLY wrong it would be. Here are a few of my reasons:
There are too many homeless unwanted children in the world that need homes.
It is a waste of money that could be used for other more important things (like improving other people's lives).
My uterus is not something to be rented out, it would be very disrespectful to my body.
I could NEVER hand over my child, I am VERY attached to my eggs (the few I have).
To carry someone else's stuff just creeps me out to no end.
I have 24/7/280 day sickness and to not get a baby at the end wouldn't make it worth it.
I don't want to be injected with hormones of questionable creation and content.
I've had three c-sections and a uterine rupture, any more babies I will carry will be MINE and ONLY mine.







:


----------



## lemurmommies (Jan 15, 2007)

I would definitely consider being a surrogate, but only for the gay couple who donated their sperm so that DP and I could have DS.

They are very good friends of ours, and I know that they would be great parents. Yes, we could have adopted, but wanted biological children. And our friend was kind enough to donate his sperm so that I could have the joy of growing our baby inside me. He has also agreed to donate sperm if we want to have more children.

While he and his partner are not interested in having kids at this time, if he would like to in the future and does not want to adopt, I would gladly be a surrogate for them (provided I am still young enough and in good health.)


----------



## The Lucky One (Oct 31, 2002)

I have thought about this before and I think the only person I *might* be able to be a surrogate for is my sister and even then I'm not so sure. I think I would be able to relinquish the baby, but I worry about taking a risk to my health. All pg's carry a risk and since I am a mother, I just cannot fathom taking an unnecessary risk that might take me from my children.

I remember reading an article years ago about surrogacy. It said something like 95% of women who enter into surrogacy report that their families are complete and that they do not desire any more children of their own. Yet, astonishingly, something like 50% of all surrogates go on to have another child (of her own) after the surrogate child they carry. That, to me, speaks volumes about the hole that must be left any time a woman 'gives up' a baby, even one that is not genetically hers.


----------



## BelgianSheepDog (Mar 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kundalini-Mama* 
I wonder how many of you (w/quite a few kiddos in your sig, congratulations) would feel if this was your life. And not only could you never birth a baby, but people judged you for your choices.

I would be sad, I would feel rage, I would have a hard time ever moving on completely. Other than that, I can only imagine.

I wouldn't consider surrogacy, even if my grief made my moral sense crumble. Why? I don't have anywhere near the money to even laugh at the idea.

And that right there is the real source of moral outrage: those who can buy the privilege are somehow entitled to mend their broken hearts. But the poor and average of us get to stay broken and just have to deal with whatever life deals us.


----------



## Silvercrest79 (Jan 20, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BelgianSheepDog* 
I would be sad, I would feel rage, I would have a hard time ever moving on completely. Other than that, I can only imagine.

I wouldn't consider surrogacy, even if my grief made my moral sense crumble. Why? I don't have anywhere near the money to even laugh at the idea.

And that right there is the real source of moral outrage: those who can buy the privilege are somehow entitled to mend their broken hearts. But the poor and average of us get to stay broken and just have to deal with whatever life deals us.









: ITA


----------



## Kundalini-Mama (Jul 15, 2002)

So, just so you know, this family that I'm talking about receive aid from the state. They are broke and living paycheck to paycheck. The women who have discussed surrogacy w/my friend have all offered their womb out of the goodness of their hearts and w/o payment. I would offer, but I have cancer. If they move forward with surrogacy it would be through fundraising efforts.

Does this make them more worthy then in your eyes b/c they are not "buying the privledge", but working their asses off to make it happen for them?


----------



## BelgianSheepDog (Mar 31, 2006)

No one can be worthy of receiving something that should never be given away. That's the point. Just like no one is a worthy candidate to own a slave.


----------



## Kundalini-Mama (Jul 15, 2002)

I'll be sure to pass that on to my friend. I'm sure that will help her w/her grief.

Thanks.


----------



## Kindermama (Nov 29, 2004)

Not for a stranger. I did once offer to be one for my stepmother and father because she couldn't carry to term and suffered many early miscarriages. They declined. That was a few years back. I do not think I would do it today or in the future.


----------



## gracesmommy (Mar 6, 2006)

I wouldn't do it, but I am amused by the google ad on this page:

Hot & Smart Egg Donors
Database of 100+ available egg donors including prof. models!

because, when you come right down to it, isn't all about the hotness?


----------



## BelgianSheepDog (Mar 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kundalini-Mama* 
I'll be sure to pass that on to my friend. I'm sure that will help her w/her grief.

Thanks.

You know, I really have no patience at all for emotional blackmail. And that is what this is.

Sometimes life is a pile of dogshit. We can't always wave a wand and make it better. Sometimes getting what we want isn't possible, or is only possible through unethical means. I could probably have tons of money if I was willing to break a few rules, legal, ethical, or otherwise. And maybe I have a really good reason for needing or wanting that money. Maybe I'm in pain or am experiencing sorrow or grief. But that doesn't make it ok. It just doesn't.

I do not think that ethical decisions should be based on being nice. There's a big difference between being nice and being good. Being nice can mean giving someone what they want, no matter what it costs. But that's not always good, right, just, or even defensible.


----------



## Ms.Doula (Apr 3, 2003)

Quote:

That all said..... I have been weighing this recently.
DH & I discussed this & decided I should NOT be a surro (mainly for health issues, difficuly PGs, 1 previous c-sect., but also for stress & family reasons)
After reading this thread though, I realise I also could not go through with it, unless it was someone close to me (a sister) and I could share in the responsibility & be a part of the child's 'village' so to speak.

We are however still concidering egg donations. I would LOVE to hear from those that have done this. Both with good stories or not so good.
Post or feel free to PM or Email me Please. Id be most appreciative!








ANYONE???







:


----------



## Periwinkle (Feb 27, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kundalini-Mama* 
I'll be sure to pass that on to my friend. I'm sure that will help her w/her grief.

Thanks.

Kundalini Mama, I read your post about your friend and can only imagine what she is going through. I also appreciate your willingness to share this with us as an important thing to consider.

I must say respectfully, however, that just because your friend wouldn't agree with our decision, own moral compass, is a little besides the point. Some of us know full well that there are people who would never have a child if it weren't for a surrogate, but that doesn't mean that we as individuals would be willing to serve as one. The fact that your friend would be sad to read this thread does not in any way change for me my conviction that I personally would never serve as a surrogate. I'm not sure what your expectations are here.


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Periwinkle* 
Kundalini Mama, I read your post about your friend and can only imagine what she is going through. I also appreciate your willingness to share this with us as an important thing to consider.

I must say respectfully, however, that just because your friend wouldn't agree with our decision, own moral compass, is a little besides the point. Some of us know full well that there are people who would never have a child if it weren't for a surrogate, but that doesn't mean that we as individuals would be willing to serve as one. The fact that your friend would be sad to read this thread does not in any way change for me my conviction that I personally would never serve as a surrogate. I'm not sure what your expectations are here.

Well I don't want to speak for Kundalini Mama as she seems quite capable of expressing herself. However, I didn't get the impression that she had an issue with individuals saying they would not be a surrogate for personal reasons but with people saying surrogacy is immoral and passing judgement on those who choose it. I could be wrong though.


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kundalini-Mama* 
I'll be sure to pass that on to my friend. I'm sure that will help her w/her grief.

Thanks.

Does your friend know you are talking about her here? I'm not sure I would feel great about that if I were her.

For the record, I'm sure I know who you mean, and altho I am usually anti-surrogacy, hell, even I would consider being a surrogate for her.

I hope she gets a baby, she sounds like an amazing mama and I hope and pray more children are destined to be hers.


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

Thinking more about it, my issues with surrogacy are more the rich renting out the wombs of the poor. I also would not have a child and turn it over to men - I believe children need mothers.

But I can see much beauty and grace in bearing a child for another mother who has suffered the tragedy of the loss of her baby, and who cannot have another child by her own body becoz of that loss. That is something I have zero ethical qualms with, in fact I think it is a wonderful use of one's uterus.


----------



## Kundalini-Mama (Jul 15, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riverscout* 
Well I don't want to speak for Kundalini Mama as she seems quite capable of expressing herself. However, I didn't get the impression that she had an issue with individuals saying they would not be a surrogate for personal reasons but with people saying surrogacy is immoral and passing judgement on those who choose it. I could be wrong though.










Thank you so much riverscout, you said this much more eloquently than I did. I have no issue at all w/mamas who could not be surrogates---no issue at all, that is an entirely personal HUGE decision. For instance, I am pro-choice, but I would never ever ever have an abortion--but I do not judge those that do, or even those who are so opposed to it. I can understand both sides.

I saw my aforementioned friend today and we were talking about the ideal surrogacy situation (something that popped into my head last night as I was trying to sleep







). Wouldn't it be great if I could get one of my own eggs fertilized by my hubby and then add her and her hubby's embryo and I could carry twins--one mine, one hers. Wouldn't that be so perfect?? I wouldn't have any of the "giving up the baby" issues, b/c I'd have a baby (of course everything would have to work 100%, but, in theory, a great idea). And the other day she was thinking as she was driving. I'm obviously unable to have another babe right now w/the cancer, so she was thinking how she would like to carry a baby for us. She is just so generous and loving. Unfortunately she realized the fallacy of her plan









thismama, your words really affected me in a way I cannot really describe. Thank you.

Amy


----------



## Ms.Doula (Apr 3, 2003)

Soooooooo like I was saying...........

Anyone Have any opinions/advice on the egg thing??









Quote:

That all said..... I have been weighing this recently.
DH & I discussed this & decided I should NOT be a surro (mainly for health issues, difficuly PGs, 1 previous c-sect., but also for stress & family reasons)
After reading this thread though, I realise I also could not go through with it, unless it was someone close to me (a sister) and I could share in the responsibility & be a part of the child's 'village' so to speak.

We are however still concidering egg donations. I would LOVE to hear from those that have done this. Both with good stories or not so good.
Post or feel free to PM or Email me Please. Id be most appreciative!


----------



## BelovedK (Jun 7, 2005)

Hi







as you may have noticed, several posts have been removed from this thread. The direction of the conversation was veering way off topic.

If you have issues with one another and/or their opinions, I urge you to take it to PM.

Quote:

Do not post in a disrespectful, defamatory, adversarial, baiting, harassing, offensive, insultingly sarcastic or otherwise improper manner, toward a member or other individual, including casting of suspicion upon a person, invasion of privacy, humiliation, demeaning criticism, name-calling, personal attack, or in any way which violates the law

Quote:

Given these guidelines, we encourage *friendly debate*, socializing, and good humor. Thank you for becoming part of our online community.

Quote:

The Mothering website is the gathering place for the reading and discussion of issues of interest to our magazine readers and online community members. We have been in print since 1974, and on the web since 1998. The magazine is read in over 70 countries. *Our community is made up of many nationalities, religions, ages, colors, ethnicities, philosophies, affectional orientations, economic groups, lifestyles, and family structures*. This is reflected in our magazine readership and in the online community of the MotheringDotCommune.


----------



## CherryBomb (Feb 13, 2005)

Even if my religion didn't prohibit surrogacy, I don't think I could do it. I don't think there's anything inherently "wrong" with it, but I couldn't do it emotionally. Even if the baby wasn't technically "mine" I don't think I could handle growing a baby inside of me and then handing over to someone else to raise. I feel the same way about adoption, I don't think it's "wrong" but I could not place a baby for adoption.

Quote:

Thinking more about it, my issues with surrogacy are more the rich renting out the wombs of the poor. I also would not have a child and turn it over to men - I believe children need mothers.
I agree with this, as well.

That said, I think surrogates often come from a deep place of love, and I respect that.


----------



## Ms.Doula (Apr 3, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *CherryBomb* 
Even if my religion didn't prohibit surrogacy, I don't think I could do it.

Out of curiosty, what religion is that? Fell free to PM me if youd rather elaborate


----------



## roadfamily6now (Sep 14, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BelgianSheepDog* 
No one can be worthy of receiving something that should never be given away. That's the point. Just like no one is a worthy candidate to own a slave.

most surrogates are NOT biologically related to the baby.
How can you say "No one can be worthy of receiving something that should never be given away. "
When it was never the surrogate's baby to begin with???


----------



## roadfamily6now (Sep 14, 2006)

Quote:

Thinking more about it, my issues with surrogacy are more the rich renting out the wombs of the poor.

I only wish to reply to this above ^

You are so right, my family income of $100,000 pales in comparision to my super rich Intended Parents. Please.







:

Most surrogates are not POOR. And most Intended Parents are not rich.


----------



## Periwinkle (Feb 27, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *roadfamily6now* 
most surrogates are NOT biologically related to the baby.
How can you say "No one can be worthy of receiving something that should never be given away. "
When it was never the surrogate's baby to begin with???

Actually, in most states, it IS the surrogate's baby. The surrogate gets to decide, when the baby is born, whether or not she will give the baby up. She can always choose to keep the baby as hers forever.

That is why I said that I know I would be "one of those" women (the ones we read about in newspapers from time to time) who opt to keep the baby after all. Because I know I would bond with it during the pregnancy and it would tear me apart to give someone away who was mine.


----------



## roadfamily6now (Sep 14, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Periwinkle* 
Actually, in most states, it IS the surrogate's baby. The surrogate gets to decide, when the baby is born, whether or not she will give the baby up. She can always choose to keep the baby as hers forever.

That is why I said that I know I would be "one of those" women (the ones we read about in newspapers from time to time) who opt to keep the baby after all. Because I know I would bond with it during the pregnancy and it would tear me apart to give someone away who was mine.


Actually, in most states you can get a pre-birth order which lists the Intended Parents as parents way before birth. This document allows the Intended Parents (generally also the Bio Parents) to be listed on the birth certificate at birth.

I think you are wise for knowing how you would feel and NOT becoming a surrogate. There are some that can and some that can't.


----------



## Baby Makes 4 (Feb 18, 2005)

It's always something I wanted to do eventually but with my multiple miscarriages and difficult pregnancies I would not be a suitable surrogate.


----------



## PrennaMama (Oct 10, 2005)

So many of these conversations can be broken down to the same "Gray Area" final resting place: What is right for one is not nec. right for another. Ethics and "moral compass" is a slippery slope, slippery enough for individuals to climb on their own, and disasterous when applied generally to the population as a whole. There are circumstances that dictate one's moral compass, and circumstances that might incite a major paradigm shift, given the right pressures. I am thankful (and suggest that other folks reflect on their thankfulness) that my circumstances have not been such that I _have_ to take another look at my moral compass, that I have the luxury of debating this topic at all, as a woman of mixed descent in an affluent and "free" society.

Even if one's code of ethics (right _now_) does not lend itself to surrogacy, that doesn't make that code of ethics any kind of Standard for All.

I don't think I'd be able to be a surrogate for a myriad reasons, both physical and emotional, but if the circumstances arranged themselves so, I know that my paradigm would easily shift, and I'd do it in a heart beat... for a loved one in desperation, for instance... But what _I_ would do has no place in statements about what anyone else should do.


----------



## Periwinkle (Feb 27, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *roadfamily6now* 
Actually, in most states you can get a pre-birth order which lists the Intended Parents as parents way before birth. This document allows the Intended Parents (generally also the Bio Parents) to be listed on the birth certificate at birth.

I think you are wise for knowing how you would feel and NOT becoming a surrogate. There are some that can and some that can't.










Right, but my understanding, based on reading about what is actually happening as well as conversations with someone who helps manage and is a technician in a big (famous even) fertility clinic who will NOT deal with surrogates because of the legal issues involved, is that all the signed papers in the world don't matter and don't hold up in court. I'd be interested to learn more about if these documents actually help a bio family win a case against a surrogate or not in other states.


----------



## roadfamily6now (Sep 14, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Periwinkle* 
Right, but my understanding, based on reading about what is actually happening as well as conversations with someone who helps manage and is a technician in a big (famous even) fertility clinic who will NOT deal with surrogates because of the legal issues involved, is that all the signed papers in the world don't matter and don't hold up in court. I'd be interested to learn more about if these documents actually help a bio family win a case against a surrogate or not in other states.

You have valid points. Unfortunately I dont have access to the information you are looking for.
I do know that some states do have actual laws on the books regarding surrogacy specifically, such as Californina and Arkansas. Those 2 states I mentioned DO uphold the contract and pre-birth order and the bioparents (or Intended Parents, bio or not) do have legal standing in court IF something were to happen.

There are some states where Surrogacy of any kind is Illegal.

I know that the bad surrogacy stories get spread around a LOT more then the good ones do. That is why people are leary of surrogacy. I have been in the surrogacy world now for 8 years and Personally, I have only known of 4 surrogacies that have ended badly and have gone to court and that is out of 300+ births a year.


----------



## CalebsMama05 (Nov 26, 2005)

I would in a heartbeat in the right situation. my sis and bil are ttc right now...they've been trying for 2 years and are being referred to an RE. if they are unable to get pregnant within their timezone (I have no idea nor do they what htat might be) then I am going to carry their baby. I have no problems with that. I will have no problems giving the baby to them when its born.

hopefully though she will be able to conceive and can give birth to her own baby.


----------



## BelgianSheepDog (Mar 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *roadfamily6now* 
most surrogates are NOT biologically related to the baby.
How can you say "No one can be worthy of receiving something that should never be given away. "
When it was never the surrogate's baby to begin with???

The baby isn't the only thing being given away in a surrogacy.


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Periwinkle* 
Actually, in most states, it IS the surrogate's baby. The surrogate gets to decide, when the baby is born, whether or not she will give the baby up. She can always choose to keep the baby as hers forever.

Even if the baby is not biologically hers? Even so, couldn't the the bio father petition the court for custody whether or not the baby is biologically his wife's or the surrogates? I carried my dd and she is biologically my child. However, I don't even think I am legally entiled to say I could "keep" her forever as mine. My dh, her biological father, could petition the court for custody, and most likely win at least partial custody, if we split. Why would it be any different in a case with a surrogate? Are they protected in some states by special laws in which they are guaranteed full custody?


----------



## Periwinkle (Feb 27, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riverscout* 
Even if the baby is not biologically hers? Even so, couldn't the the bio father petition the court for custody whether or not the baby is biologically his wife's or the surrogates? I carried my dd and she is biologically my child. However, I don't even think I am legally entiled to say I could "keep" her forever as mine. My dh, her biological father, could petition the court for custody, and most likely win at least partial custody, if we split. Why would it be any different in a case with a surrogate? Are they protected in some states by special laws in which they are guaranteed full custody?

No, the issue is that in many circumstances, the birth mother IS the legal mother of the child. That's what is hard. It's not about an inviolable contract, just that you'd have to go through the same hoops to take the child away from its birth mother that you would to take ANY child away from its bio/birth mother. The state doesn't recognize that the child belongs to ANYONE else but the birth mother. It doesn't confer extra rights or anything, but as everyone knows full well, courts like to keep babies with their mothers most of the time, especially without any cause, and so visitation rights might be the best you could get out of it.


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Periwinkle* 
No, the issue is that in many circumstances, the birth mother IS the legal mother of the child. That's what is hard. It's not about an inviolable contract, just that you'd have to go through the same hoops to take the child away from its birth mother that you would to take ANY child away from its bio/birth mother. The state doesn't recognize that the child belongs to ANYONE else but the birth mother. It doesn't confer extra rights or anything, but as everyone knows full well, courts like to keep babies with their mothers most of the time, especially without any cause, and so visitation rights might be the best you could get out of it.

I can see your point if a case involved a surrogate who was also the genetic mother. However, I just don't think it would be that easy for a gestational surrogate to keep the baby, particularly if the intened mother was also the bio mother (in other words, no third party egg donor was used). Just because the state doesn't recognize any other woman other than the woman who gave birth as the mother doesn't mean that the state believes gestation supersedes genetics, but more likely that the state simply does not have legislation regarding surrogacy. Also, there could be case law, and if not, a judge still has the ability to set a precident. Does anyone know if there has ever been a case where a gestational surrogate was allowed by the courts to keep the baby rather than genetic parents? I did a google search, but I am not very good at that.


----------



## Periwinkle (Feb 27, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riverscout* 
I can see your point if a case involved a surrogate who was also the genetic mother. However, I just don't think it would be that easy for a gestational surrogate to keep the baby, particularly if the intened mother was also the bio mother (in other words, no third party egg donor was used). Just because the state doesn't recognize any other woman other than the woman who gave birth as the mother doesn't mean that the state believes gestation supersedes genetics, but more likely that the state simply does not have legislation regarding surrogacy. Also, there could be case law, and if not, a judge still has the ability to set a precident. Does anyone know if there has ever been a case where a gestational surrogate was allowed by the courts to keep the baby rather than genetic parents? I did a google search, but I am not very good at that.









Yes, there have absolutely been cases... Baby M to start with. As others have pointed out, they have been highly publicized and are not the norm. However, it DOES happen. And the gestational surrgogate gets to keep the baby, end of story. It happened in my former homestate, where that fertility clinic is I referenced earlier. It made a huge splash, but in the end, the infertile couple lost their baby to the surrogate, though I think they were granted visitation rights.









What my point was, is that if I were a surrogate, I could see myself being one of those women who loses it at the end of the pregnancy and can't handle giving the baby up. I get attached very early on in pregnancy, and it would kill me to hand the baby over even if it wasn't genetically mine.

A lot of fertility clinics don't deal with surrogates because of all the legal issues involved, ranging from ethical issues (the "renting uteruses" and "exploiting the poor" and "we don't buy and sell humans" aspects already discussed in this thread) as well as the issue of not having a sure thing... that the surrogate could change her mind at the last minute and your client doesn't get her baby.

And yes, when you add to that having a baby that is not fully genetically of the intended/adoptive parents, it is even more complicated. Women whose eggs are bad can get a donor egg and their husband's sperm, or the surrogate's egg and their husband's sperm, or the surrogate's egg and donor sperm, or donor egg AND donor sperm, and then the idea is that the infertile couple will still get the baby in the end. But the surrogate decides not to give the baby up after all. What I was saying is I can completely see myself not wanting to do that. And even more so if this fairly common scenario were the case.


----------



## siobhang (Oct 23, 2005)

what disturbs me about the ethical conversation about surrogates really comes down to the concept of "property" - who "owns" the child. If the child is my biological dna and birthed from my body, then it is presumed the child is "mine" - but if I "rent" my womb to gestate someone else's dna, etc etc. And if I "giv e" away that child, it no longer belongs to me.

The entire conversation is about ownership of a child, akin to ownership of a piece of property. But this is very culturally specific.

What I find fascinating is that in West Africa, there is a concept of "fostering" - if a woman is unable to have a child, she is "given" responsibility for a child by a family member - not in the sense of the child belongs to her, but that she is now responsible for raising that child, to have the experience of motherhood. The child is, and will always be, part of its birth family. But it is as well part of the foster family too.

There is a lifelong connection now between the families - forged by the child - and each family is supposed to gain from the experience.

Yes, it is usually poorer members of families who will foster their children with wealthier members of the family - the idea is that children are always a welcome addition for a family (a resource, in a Marxist perspective) - and one that can be shared.

For what it is worth, I personally could only be a surrogate in a situation where I would be a full member of the child's life - not in the role of mother, per se, but definitely aunt or other loving relative. I would worry too much otherwise. So, similarly to others, for a sibling or very close friend, yes, I would.

Siobhan


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Periwinkle* 
Yes, there have absolutely been cases... Baby M to start with.

Wasn't Baby M the surrogate's biological child?


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riverscout* 
Wasn't Baby M the surrogate's biological child?

I just googled it, so I'll answer my own question in case anyone else wants to know.









Baby M was the surrogate's biological daughter. Also, the biological father and his wife were awarded custody. The surrogate's parental rights were terminated and she was only awarded visitation.


----------



## Periwinkle (Feb 27, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riverscout* 
I just googled it, so I'll answer my own question in case anyone else wants to know.









Baby M was the surrogate's biological daughter. Also, the biological father and his wife were awarded custody. The surrogate's parental rights were terminated and she was only awarded visitation.

oops. In any case, this is hardly something I'd like to have happen - this case was a disaster. And the surrogate got visitation for 18 YEARS!!! A nightmare.

Like I said, in my former homestate, a non-biological surrogate got custody. Period.


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Periwinkle* 
oops. In any case, this is hardly something I'd like to have happen - this case was a disaster. And the surrogate got visitation for 18 YEARS!!! A nightmare.

Like I said, in my former homestate, a non-biological surrogate got custody. Period.


I agree it was a disaster. The little girl was almost 2 by the time there was a decision. I can't even imagine what she must have gone through. I remember watching the news and seeing them take her away. It was a real media circus.

Please forgive me if you may have mentioned this, but as far as the case in you former homestate, were *both* of the inteneded parents also the genetic parents? If so, could you give me a little bit more information about the case, like at least the state, so I can try and look it up and read more about it. I would be very interested to see how the judge came to his or her decision and to see if there was/is an appeal. If you don't feel comfortable posting the state, maybe you could pm me. I won't tell anybody.


----------



## mommy2two babes (Feb 7, 2007)

siobhang said:


> what disturbs me about the ethical conversation about surrogates really comes down to the concept of "property" - who "owns" the child. If the child is my biological dna and birthed from my body, then it is presumed the child is "mine" - but if I "rent" my womb to gestate someone else's dna, etc etc. And if I "giv e" away that child, it no longer belongs to me.
> 
> The entire conversation is about ownership of a child, akin to ownership of a piece of property. But this is very culturally specific.
> 
> ...


----------



## Mamma Christi (Dec 15, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *KsMum* 
If they needed to use my eggs, then for my sister only, using someone elses eggs, then also for friends. Not for a stranger.

Same for me as well


----------



## roadfamily6now (Sep 14, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BelgianSheepDog* 
The baby isn't the only thing being given away in a surrogacy.

I have been a surrogate twice now. Perhaps you can enlighten me as to what you are talking about.








:


----------



## BelgianSheepDog (Mar 31, 2006)

The right to bodily autonomy is always sacrificed somewhat during pregnancy in our culture. What a woman eats, drinks, smokes, how she exercises, what medicine she takes, is no longer solely about her and society feels free to interfere with her body in various ways. All the more so when someone else holds a contract granting them the fetus in your womb.


----------



## kkar (May 22, 2005)

No, I'm one of those people (high risk complications aside) who just doesn't really enjoy pregnancy. The only thing that gets me through is knowing that *I'll* have a baby at the end of the process. I would be crushed if I had to give it away.


----------



## mommy2two babes (Feb 7, 2007)

Subbing







:


----------



## mommy2two babes (Feb 7, 2007)

: Said I was subbing then never did lol


----------



## roadfamily6now (Sep 14, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BelgianSheepDog* 
The right to bodily autonomy is always sacrificed somewhat during pregnancy in our culture. What a woman eats, drinks, smokes, how she exercises, what medicine she takes, is no longer solely about her and society feels free to interfere with her body in various ways. All the more so when someone else holds a contract granting them the fetus in your womb.

um, okay..... (look of confusion)

I dont care who's baby this is. I will do my best to grow one as healthy as possible. What does that have to do with surrogacy?
I was not forced to become a surrogate. This was my choice and I picked the people I would work with. No one! NO ONE tells me what I can or cannot do. I make decisions about my body and pregnancy based on what I feel is right.


----------



## Periwinkle (Feb 27, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *roadfamily6now* 
um, okay..... (look of confusion)

I dont care who's baby this is. I will do my best to grow one as healthy as possible. What does that have to do with surrogacy?
I was not forced to become a surrogate. This was my choice and I picked the people I would work with. No one! NO ONE tells me what I can or cannot do. I make decisions about my body and pregnancy based on what I feel is right.

With respect, I think you're thinking about this more concretely than BSD was talking about. And I'm surprised to see you say "NO ONE tells me what I can or cannot do" since you have a contract to give away the baby you give birth to. That's about as 'telling you what to do' as it gets. It's not about whether anyone forced you to become a surrogate, but the fact that your consent to hand the baby over is besides the point... it's simply not needed... that baby will be taken at birth regardless of whether you want it to happen or not.

But I think - and BSD correct me if I'm wrong - that she was talking more philosophically about what it's like to be pregnant. You go from being your own person to having it seem ok, even expected, to have OTHER PEOPLE commenting on your body, making decisions about your healthcare, and feeling ownership over the results of your choices. Surely you can't argue with that aspect. Unless you're doing UP/UC, and even then, I'd suppose that a lot of what you did was based on your cultural expectations of what you should be doing during pregnancy (measuring fundal height, checking cervix, taking BP, counting fetal movements, etc.) ... expectations that others gave you - it's not like these things are instincts for women to perform during pregnancy!


----------



## BelgianSheepDog (Mar 31, 2006)

I've heard of one surrogate contract that allowed for a homebirth. I've heard of many more where the "parents" not doing the gestating stipulated that the pregnant woman must "consent" to a c-section if it was deemed necessary.

Even outside surrogacy women have been forced into sections and other interventions.


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Periwinkle* 
And I'm surprised to see you say "NO ONE tells me what I can or cannot do" since you have a contract to give away the baby you give birth to. That's about as 'telling you what to do' as it gets. It's not about whether anyone forced you to become a surrogate, but the fact that your consent to hand the baby over is besides the point... it's simply not needed... that baby will be taken at birth regardless of whether you want it to happen or not.

Didn't she "consent" to give the baby up when she signed the contract of her own free will? How is that someone "telling [her] what to do?"

Also, you say "that baby will be taken at birth regardless of whether you want it to happen or not" but earlier you were very firm that a surrogate had the right to keep the baby if she wants to no matter what.







:


----------



## Periwinkle (Feb 27, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riverscout* 
Didn't she "consent" to give the baby up when she signed the contract of her own free will? How is that someone "telling [her] what to do?"

Also, you say "that baby will be taken at birth regardless of whether you want it to happen or not" but earlier you were very firm that a surrogate had the right to keep the baby if she wants to no matter what.







:

People who have free will can withdraw their consent at any time. She cannot. She cannot decide tomorrow to withdraw her consent.*

*And please... I'm talking philosophically here about control over one's body when pregnant in general and a surrogate specifically, not feeling the need to rehash the whole "what if the court upholds her changing her mind" thing for the sake of not clouding the issue or beating a dead horse.


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Periwinkle* 
*And please... I'm talking philosophically here about control over one's body when pregnant in general and a surrogate specifically, not feeling the need to rehash the whole "what if the court upholds her changing her mind" thing for the sake of not clouding the issue or beating a dead horse.










No need for the "and please." I simply asked because I was confused about where you were coming from. It seemed earlier you were saying surrogates had the power to change their minds and then it appeared were saying the opposite. As far as the legal stuff I asked you about earlier, that was not a challenge. Sorry if you feel I was "beating a dead horse." But I seriously wanted to know more about the case. I find things like that interesting. Sorry if I offended you in some way.


----------



## Carma (Feb 10, 2006)

Don't think I could do it, I would be afraid something bad could happen to me such that I could not be there for my own childeren anymore. Pregnancy and delivery are not without risks. Maybe I would do it for my sisters. I know what infertility is like, it took us 3 years to conceive DD.

Carma


----------



## wombjuice (Feb 22, 2007)

My mom is married to a younger man, and he doesn't want children right now. She's afraid that if and when he wants a child, she might not be physically able to have one.

Would I be her surrogate?

I'm just not sure. It's not the issue of carrying a baby to term and then parting with it, because this particular baby would end up being my brother or sister so I'd be a part of their life. But...what about all the children in the world who have no family? Wouldn't adoption just be a better choice in her situation?

I just don't know. This is a tough question. Lots of conflicting emotional data to sort though.







:


----------



## BelgianSheepDog (Mar 31, 2006)

Sounds like you'd be his surrogate, not hers. She already has at least one child.

Does it not seem disturbing to think of receiving sperm from one's stepfather and gestating one's half-sibling? I would think this would fall under several social taboos.


----------



## PrennaMama (Oct 10, 2005)

Social taboos are just that... taboos. It was considered tabboo for women to wear pants, at one point. It was considered taboo for white women to "intermingle" with black men.(<- and still is in some places...







: )

Western cultural paradigms. Not nec. right, and very often _not_.

No one's suggesting it's an ideal arrangement, nor that anyone ought to sleep with their mother's husband and such, but rather, that if circumstances arrange themselves so, and the need is there, some are willing to allow for that paradigm shift, in order to facillitate what, for their individual moral compass, seems right... the gift of motherhood / fatherhood. Some have the strength of character and spirit to do this... some find it abhorrent. Is it possible that those who find it distasteful are simply products of a puritanically-based society, reacting to paradigmal dogma?


----------



## BelgianSheepDog (Mar 31, 2006)

I think the incest taboo is a pretty sensible one, actually. I wouldn't compare it to women wearing pants.


----------



## PrennaMama (Oct 10, 2005)

Incest is an ugly word for (potentially) agreeing to carry a child of one's mother, and one's step father... isn't incest: Sexual relations between persons who are so closely related that their marriage is illegal or forbidden by custom.
The statutory crime of sexual relations with such a near relative?

I don't see any incest mentioned anywhere in this whole thread, girl, except by you.


----------



## BelgianSheepDog (Mar 31, 2006)

Incest taboo is an anthropological term. For the last couple ten thousand years of human history, having your stepfather's child meant having sex with him. There was a taboo against this for a number of very good reasons. I don't think it's either good or reasonable to expect that history to be forgotten and thrown aside now that doctors can play god and put babies wherever they wish.


----------



## PrennaMama (Oct 10, 2005)

This 2007... welcome to the new millenium. The standards our predessecors set for us don't hold true all the time nowadays.

Slippery slope, indeed...


----------



## BelgianSheepDog (Mar 31, 2006)

If you've got an argument in favor of abolishing the incest taboo I'm all ears. Just saying "it's the new millennium!" is not an argument, though.


----------



## wombjuice (Feb 22, 2007)

Oh my. If I was really affected by social taboos, I'd be a melting, sobbing puddle on the ground by now.









In general, I've never really cared much about what society thinks of the way I live _my_ life.









Now, besides the fact that I'm not quite sure that you (BSD) truly understand what incest is, I never said I planned on offering _my_ egg.


----------



## roadfamily6now (Sep 14, 2006)

Quote:

It seemed earlier you were saying surrogates had the power to change their minds .
Everyone has the power to change their minds at anytime.
Surrogacy, pregnancy, jobs, which house to buy, what is for dinner........etc.

It is what you decide to do that makes the difference.


----------



## roadfamily6now (Sep 14, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BelgianSheepDog* 
Sounds like you'd be his surrogate, not hers. She already has at least one child.

Does it not seem disturbing to think of receiving sperm from one's stepfather and gestating one's half-sibling? I would think this would fall under several social taboos.

Absloutely, however in a case like that more likely then not, there would be donor eggs or something so there would NOT be a genetic connection between the surrogate and her possible sibling.


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *roadfamily6now* 
Everyone has the power to change their minds at anytime.
Surrogacy, pregnancy, jobs, which house to buy, what is for dinner........etc.

It is what you decide to do that makes the difference.

Sorry I was not more careful with my words. I meant the _legal right_ rather than simply "the power." Not sure if that makes a difference or not. Just thought I'd mention it.


----------



## Periwinkle (Feb 27, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *feminine_earth* 
My mom is married to a younger man, and he doesn't want children right now. She's afraid that if and when he wants a child, she might not be physically able to have one.

Would I be her surrogate?

I'm just not sure. It's not the issue of carrying a baby to term and then parting with it, because this particular baby would end up being my brother or sister so I'd be a part of their life. But...what about all the children in the world who have no family? Wouldn't adoption just be a better choice in her situation?

I just don't know. This is a tough question. Lots of conflicting emotional data to sort though.







:

Wow. I think this is really tough ethically. I think that you can feel a little better by knowing that *****HUGE DISCLAIMER: I'm TALKING GENERALLY HERE ****** women who have eggs that are still "good" are typically still fertile. It is highly unusual for a women who has a "proven" fertility track record (conceiving and bearing healthy children) to all of a sudden only lose part of her fertility, like she'd have great eggs and a bad uterus or a perfect uterus but bad eggs.... it all starts to decline together most of the time. So just saying, she'd be unlikely to have star quality eggs and a shot uterus. Unless you'd be okay with it being YOUR egg and your stepfather's sperm, you probably won't have to cross this bridge.







(note: this info is based on the experience/clinical opinion of a fertility doctor I spoke with combined with common sense / knowledge of how menopause typically works)

As for the adoption question, I don't think it should be considered as any different than anyone wanting to have a baby of their own biologically. Either you care about that sort of thing or you don't. I think every person has a right to want their own bio child, and you can't slam a mother considering use of a surrogate to have a child any more than you can slam any mother who has her own offspring. That is one slippery slope. Where does it end? What about the mother who knows she will have a high risk pregnancy or knows she has HIV but hopes she can avoid transmission to the baby or knows she has a high risk of a baby with a birth defect... would you say "well, she should just adopt"? People aren't pound puppies.


----------



## wombjuice (Feb 22, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Periwinkle* 
...and you can't slam a mother considering use of a surrogate to have a child any more than you can slam any mother who has her own offspring.

I hope that's not what you think I meant. I am not "slamming" any mother who wants to have her own biological children. I was simply considering whether or not it would be best for my own mother to adopt. She already has two biological children, and I'm not saying that she shouldn't want anymore, only that in her particular case, adoption might be a better choice.

This is all hypothetical, of course, she has never asked me to be a surrogate. I simply saw the discussion and it got me thinking about what I would do were I in this position. And you're absolutely right, it really is an insanely tough question ethically. Truth is, I have no idea how I truly feel about the issue. I'm confused.


----------



## roadfamily6now (Sep 14, 2006)

Quote:

It is highly unusual for a women who has a "proven" fertility track record (conceiving and bearing healthy children) to all of a sudden only lose part of her fertility, like she'd have great eggs and a bad uterus or a perfect uterus but bad eggs.... it all starts to decline together most of the time. So just saying, she'd be unlikely to have star quality eggs and a shot uterus.
First of all, this is not true.
There are plenty of women how undergo what is called "secondary infertility". They had no trouble getting pregnany and staying pregnant for a kid or two but then cannot seem to be pregnant again for unknown or known reasons.
Also, it is not true that "everything" goes at the same time.
You will find plenty of women with bad eggs or with something wrong with their uterus.
There is many many factors when one is dealing with infertility.

Quote:

Unless you'd be okay with it being YOUR egg and your stepfather's sperm, you probably won't have to cross this bridge
There are many ways to do surrogacy and this is not really a viable option.
In her situation, what they would probably do would be to use DONOR EGGS and the Dad's sperm. Or just find a different surrogate who was not related.
No one said she would be donating her eggs.
Besides, the whole situation was hypothetical.


----------



## theretohere (Nov 4, 2005)

I would think about it, but I know that DH is totally opposed. So I guess the answer is no.


----------



## brightonwoman (Mar 27, 2007)

I would donate eggs to a relative or dear friend....I would also support dh donating his sperm. I couldn't bear to carry and birth a baby and not get to keep it though.
Besides, I miscarry a lot, so I'm probalby not a good candidate.....


----------



## Ms.Doula (Apr 3, 2003)

Where would one look for info on donating Eggs to IPs??


----------



## UberMama (Feb 27, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Ms.Doula* 
Where would one look for info on donating Eggs to IPs??

http://www.surromomsonline.com/support Try the ED (egg donation) board, to skim through or make a post with your questions.


----------



## mommy2two babes (Feb 7, 2007)

Bump


----------



## lovingmommyhood (Jul 28, 2006)

No, I doubt I could handle it. I don't consider myself strong enough to give up a baby, genetically matched to me or not. Kudos to those who can though!


----------



## CaraNicole (Feb 28, 2007)

_i think i might would do it if all the cards were right..._

_~ pretty hardcore AP/NFL_
_~ no circ if it's a boy_
_~ i'd would want to be kinda involved in this childs life (not as a parent)_
_~ no vax_
_~ not my eggs_

_but since i know only two people IRL like this...i'm pretty sure it's never going to happen!_


----------



## caedmyn (Jan 13, 2006)

No, I wouldn't be able to do. Actually I think it's unethical to do at all (no flames please, personal opinion).


----------



## mommato5 (Feb 19, 2007)

Honestly, I'm torn on the issue.

I'm really beginning to look at any kind of infertility treatment as not right. Something just does not seem right to play God. One person has that right and none of us are him.

On the other had, I know a couple who have ben trying for ten years. I have shed so many tears with her over her struggles. I know they would make wonderful parents and dream of the day they are blessed with a baby. I would consider doing gestational surrogacy to help them. I would also do that for my sisters.


----------



## Blueena (Apr 3, 2007)

I say kudos to those who can emotional and physicallly handle being a surrogate, I don't think I could do it.


----------

