Views on people who use a surrogate? (normal, chances, range)

[maciesmom]

I understand what you're saying, but I didn't actively want children. They just happened.

So somehow this makes you a better person than someone who at the very least WANTS children and chooses to use a surrogate? Most people I know actively chose to have children. Not so say there weren't a few "oops" or it happened earlier than planned but they chose to nontheless. It is pretty easy to NOT have children. Personally, I'd rather someone who at least wants them has them. That is a bigger problem for me. Too many people who have children who don't really want them or take care of them (not inferring in any way that you personally didn't want them once they were there or didn't take care of them - just 'in general'). My point was (and still is) unless you are going to hold everyone to this standard of adopting, it is unfair to demand it only of a few people.

[maciesmom]

Those discussions happen when people have children they can't afford.

Plenty of people have children they can't afford. That is an entirely different topic.

[Hopes]

Originally Posted by maciesmom

So somehow this makes you a better person than someone who at the very least WANTS children and chooses to use a surrogate?

That's sort of leap and an attack you've made there. I never implied I thought I was a better person.

(Since you brought it up, I think it makes me a worse person. Thanks for asking.)

I was merely being honest to point out that it's illogical for you to expect every person who has a child to adopt a child.

Afterall, someone has to give up those children so there will be children to adopt.

Originally Posted by maciesmom

Most people I know actively chose to have children. Not so say there weren't a few "oops" or it happened earlier than planned but they chose to nontheless.

Oh, in the end, I definitely chose to have children. I'm just pointing out that I wasn't actively wanting children.

If I had never gotten pregnant, I believe I would have never had children. It just wasn't something on my radar.

Originally Posted by maciesmom

Personally, I'd rather someone who at least wants them has them. That is a bigger problem for me. Too many people who have children who don't really want them or take care of them (not inferring in any way that you personally didn't want them once they were there or didn't take care of them - just 'in general'). My point was (and still is) unless you are going to hold everyone to this standard of adopting, it is unfair to demand it only of a few people.

Well, I'm glad that you've revealed that you're just as capable of judging how people form families like you accused others of doing.

[Hopes]

Originally Posted by maciesmom

Plenty of people have children they can't afford. That is an entirely different topic.

Then why did you bring it up?

You said no one is asking people who conceive naturally to justify their decision.

I contend that you're wrong because people often ask why people have children they can't afford.

I answered your question. If it's off topic then your question was off topic. Revisit it:

Originally Posted by maciesmom

I guess where I keep getting "stuck" in this discussion is that no one is asking why people who conceive "the old fashioned way" to justify their decision, so why should anyone else have to justify the very private decision for their family?

[maciesmom]

No not judging HOW people get families at all. All I said was that I was much more concerned with people who had children who neglected them (regardless of how that happens but since you pointed out that many people accidentally have kids it would logically follow that a higher percentage of people who conceive naturally than someone who "jumped through hoops" regardless of whether those hoops were through adoption, surrogacy, in vitro whatever), than I was in HOW they got them. I truly don't see how anyone can judge how another person was fortunate enough to have children - regardless of how they got them. Why not just be happy for them? Unless they are going on welfare, it really isn't our business.

[maciesmom]

Then why did you bring it up?

Huh? I was responding to your assertion that it was a relevant reason to question surrogacy. It is a question for anyone having kids regardless of the method- I'm really not following any logic of your arguments at all. I am standing by my assertion that I don't belong in the private family decisions of others. I think that sums up my thoughts on the matter so I guess I'll have nothing more to add here.

[Hopes]

I think I should clarify my intial statement in this thread.

I was thinking about the people who chose bio over adoption for the sole reason of wanting a bio child, not because adoption is complicated, expensive, etc.

Imagine a family that's having a hard time conceiving who are considering surrogacy.

A sister approaches them to adopt an unwanted pregnancy, but they refuse to adopt the soon to be born baby because they want a 100% bio and nothing else.

That just doesn't set right with me. That doesn't make me a better or worse person. It simply makes me a person who has an opinion.

And for the record, my family is a family that chose adoption over a 100% bio children. My husband adopted my children. None of our children are 100% bio.

[formercalifornian]

Forgive me if this has already been mentioned. Surrogacy is a great option for a woman who has viable eggs, but cannot carry a pregnancy to term.

On a personal note, my husband and I had to go to extraordinary lengths to bring our children into the world. I'm very grateful for the advances in reproductive medicine that allowed us to conceive. We looked briefly into adoption and would have pursued it had we been unsuccessful with fertility treatment.

[Hopes]

Originally Posted by maciesmom

I truly don't see how anyone can judge how another person was fortunate enough to have children - regardless of how they got them. Why not just be happy for them? Unless they are going on welfare, it really isn't our business.

Maybe other people have personal experiences with people who only want bio children.

Think about that. Really think about that. The elephant in the room is what never occurred to you.

[Hopes]

Originally Posted by formercalifornian

Forgive me if this has already been mentioned. Surrogacy is a great option for a woman who has viable eggs, but cannot carry a pregnancy to term.

On a personal note, my husband and I had to go to extraordinary lengths to bring our children into the world. I'm very grateful for the advances in reproductive medicine that allowed us to conceive. We looked briefly into adoption and would have pursued it had we been unsuccessful with fertility treatment.

I just want to say that I'm happy for you---and I'm happy for those who were also able to adopt.

I'm probably focusing my opinion on a very small percentage of people with the sick mentality I have described.