Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is an interesting story about how so many things can go wrong with surrogacy. Anybody considering surrogacy should be aware of some hidden dangers.
I'm in favor of sperm donors, egg donors and surrogacy for couples who can't carry their own child but unfortunately it put disadvantaged women like Kelly in the position of renting out their body for money. I don't think this is right. If she wanted to do it for altruistic reasons and be reimbursed for medical expenses that would be one thing, but as long as financial gain is part of the equation unfortunate situations like this will be making headlines. Of course this could have happened even if she didn't do it for money but this puts impoverished women (especially in India) in a very vulnerable situation.
I just read this article as well. I do think there should be compensation allowed, as they are providing a service, and if you want a baby, and have to rely on just altruistic volunteers, you will be severely limited. But I also think you should be able to sell bone marrow, and that is controversial as well.
But that story was very interesting. First of all, even though I oppose abortion, I am leary of the triumph of morals that this story portrays, as she was offered 10k, and wasn't exactly outraged and refused, but rather counteroffered to do it for 15k. I'm pretty sure that my morals and values can't be compromised for an extra 5k, or else they wouldn't be morals, they would be whims. While she calls it "a moment of weakness", I'm pretty sure that moment would have extended right through the abortion if her offer had been accepted.
And while I support her right not to abort, it is sickening that this poor child was used as a pawn by both her and the biological parents, and I don't agree with her having moved to another state so that she could dictate who adopted the child, as opposed to abiding by the contract she agreed to, and letting the biological arrange for the state to take custody and do adoption that way, as sick as that was, too. Sad all around.
Wow. I hadn't heard about this situation until you posted it. What a complicated mess. And the outlook for Baby S. isn't very optimistic. To me, there were no monsters or heroes here, just various people who wanted to do "the right thing," but there was no choice that would be acceptable to everyone. I am thankful for the couple who adopted Baby S.
I just read this article as well. I do think there should be compensation allowed, as they are providing a service, and if you want a baby, and have to rely on just altruistic volunteers, you will be severely limited. But I also think you should be able to sell bone marrow, and that is controversial as well.What about selling other body parts like kidneys? We put poor people in such desperate situations and you know brokers will be the ones making the most money.
But that story was very interesting. First of all, even though I oppose abortion, I am leary of the triumph of morals that this story portrays, as she was offered 10k, and wasn't exactly outraged and refused, but rather counteroffered to do it for 15k. I'm pretty sure that my morals and values can't be compromised for an extra 5k, or else they wouldn't be morals, they would be whims. While she calls it "a moment of weakness", I'm pretty sure that moment would have extended right through the abortion if her offer had been accepted. I got the feeling she was just trying to see what their response was. I doubt she would abort. BTW i am definitely pro choice.
And while I support her right not to abort, it is sickening that this poor child was used as a pawn by both her and the biological parents, and I don't agree with her having moved to another state so that she could dictate who adopted the child, as opposed to abiding by the contract she agreed to, and letting the biological arrange for the state to take custody and do adoption that way, as sick as that was, too. Sad all around.
In the end the child was adopted out anyway and it looks like she was more concerned with control even though she did contemplate for a tiny second keeping the child herself.
I think this is a cautionary tale about who couples decide to do surrogacy. Obviously more thorough screening should have been done and what about genetic testing of both the egg donor and the sperm donor. and the couple did not give full disclosure. and I'm sorry but they already had 2 kids with medical problems and 3 total. Why did they need 4?
In the end the child was adopted out anyway and it looks like she was more concerned with control even though she did contemplate for a tiny second keeping the child herself.
I think this is a cautionary tale about who couples decide to do surrogacy. Obviously more thorough screening should have been done and what about genetic testing of both the egg donor and the sperm donor. and the couple did not give full disclosure. and I'm sorry but they already had 2 kids with medical problems and 3 total. Why did they need 4?
I think there is definitely a line between blood, bone barrow, sperm, eggs and major organs. I don't know where the line is, but yes, I definitely don't think people should be allowed to sell major organs. I read an article about people dying when a bone marrow transplant would save them. Some people enter the database matching system with the best intentions, but when the time comes to actually make the actual donation, they are not available for some reason. Compensation might make them more available.
I don't think she was just guaging their response. If you were morally opposed to something like abortion, you would never entertain an offer for money, never mind coming back with a counteroffer. You would only engage in such negotiations if you were not morally opposed, but felt that it was an inconvenience or an imposition that could be offset with compensation. I agree that she was more concerned with control... then took righteousness when the money was unavailable.
It is interesting that they already have 3 with medical problems..... would they kill one of their existing ones or give them up to the state? And now they want to keep in touch with her, and hold her, after they obviously made it clear they don't think she was worthy of life and failed to end her life.
Only one thing is clear, than God a third party stepped up.
This was a sad story, but this is an exception. We had twins via surrogacy and didn't have a single problem. Two healthy, happy kids, still have a good relationship with our surrogate, althgough she's in another state.
It sounds like the agency was pretty shady. My friend has been (and is currently) a surrogate for a gay couple. The agency she works with has very strict income requirements to weed out any people doing it because they need money. My friend gets compensated for medical costs as well as for being a surrogate, but she also has a regular full time job and certainly isn't struggling financially. Also, a legitimate agency draws up a legal contract beforehand outlining the requirements for medical care, compensation, and what to do in a situation like the one described in the article.
It sounds like the agency was pretty shady. My friend has been (and is currently) a surrogate for a gay couple. The agency she works with has very strict income requirements to weed out any people doing it because they need money. My friend gets compensated for medical costs as well as for being a surrogate, but she also has a regular full time job and certainly isn't struggling financially. Also, a legitimate agency draws up a legal contract beforehand outlining the requirements for medical care, compensation, and what to do in a situation like the one described in the article.
the biological parent's right to decide on an abortion was in the contract. Although you can write anything you want in a contract, it doesn't always mean it is legally binding. Just like contracts that say that a company is not responsible for gross negligence, or strict non compete contracts... there are just certain legal rights you can't sign away. No court in this country is going to tie you down and rip a baby from your womb, regardless of what you have signed.
Yes, the agency and the surrogate do sound shady. Who wakes up one day and starts making phone calls to see who can get them pregnant that very month, just because they don't want to be pregnant in the summer? Isn't this sort of thing something you plan in advance, after meeting the potential parents? Last time I checked, summer comes the same time every year. It sounds to me like she couldn't make rent that month, and needed some cash quick.
the biological parent's right to decide on an abortion was in the contract. Although you can write anything you want in a contract, it doesn't always mean it is legally binding. Just like contracts that say that a company is not responsible for gross negligence, or strict non compete contracts... there are just certain legal rights you can't sign away. No court in this country is going to tie you down and rip a baby from your womb, regardless of what you have signed.
Yes, the agency and the surrogate do sound shady. Who wakes up one day and starts making phone calls to see who can get them pregnant that very month, just because they don't want to be pregnant in the summer? Isn't this sort of thing something you plan in advance, after meeting the potential parents? Last time I checked, summer comes the same time every year. It sounds to me like she couldn't make rent that month, and needed some cash quick.
Sorry, I missed that part. It still makes the agency sound shady by putting something into a contract with the parents knowing that it may not actually be legally binding!
A sad story. Better legal controls do need to be in place for such situations. I think as the surrogate she should have done what the couple wished. That is a risk of being a surrogate, you are supposed to be pregnant for another couple, not yourself. Not all women can separate themselves from the physical reality of the pregnancy however. It is a very hard thing to do. So sad for all involved.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
