Would you ever consider being a surrogate? - Page 3

[Phoenix_Rising]

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.

Originally Posted by Daisie125

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

Just curious as to where it is illegal. . .

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]

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]

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]

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]

NAK - GREAT POST, BSD! oops caps lock!

[PiePie]

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

[wife&mommy]

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]

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

[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.

[Phoenix_Rising]

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.

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]

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

[Tigeresse]

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

[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?

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Originally Posted by BelgianSheepDog

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

:

[twin monkeys]

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]

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.