Turn on thread page Beta

Commercial surrogacy should be made lawful watch

  • View Poll Results: Should surrogates be able to charge fees for their services?
    Yes! Cash, Paypal or Visa! :-D
    25
    64.10%
    No. Reproduction is not a commodity
    14
    35.90%

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Rent a Womb.

    Yes or no?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    God no. I would be personally against anything like that. Child-birth should be a loving, stimulating experience between a potential mother and father not a wham-bam-thank-you-maam buy one get one free commercial venture.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by e-lover)
    God no. I would be personally against anything like that. Child-birth should be a loving, stimulating experience between a potential mother and father not a wham-bam-thank-you-maam buy one get one free commercial venture.
    Why do you feel that way?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tufts)
    Why do you feel that way?
    Call me old fashioned but I just view a relationship between a baby and his/her parents like that.

    A child should enter this world with a strong foundation of love based between the maternal mother not a child they picked up after a 9 month wait. It just isn't the same. I believe it is wrong and robs the woman of the experience of pregnancy and the couple of the emotional gain they feel when expecting a child. And how can we be certain the surrogate mother will want to give her child? It is infact part hers, what if she falls in love with HER child?

    And making it commercial makes me feel sick. I would personally move country if it ever got legalised her. I dont want my kids growing up with such 'enterprise'.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Well it would (one assumes) only be used in the event that a woman couldn't, for whatever reason, bear the baby herself. Hence the need for a surrogate. So the first part of your objection about "should have the experience of pregnancy" doesn't apply if that just isn't possible.

    As to the second though, one would have to worry about the impact upon the surrogate's mental and physical health. Childbirth isn't without (small) risks, but probably more important is as you say the mental side of things.

    Once something is commercialised it opens the door for potential exploitation, possible in any unequal financial relationship - of course, one can say the answer to this is good regulation but inevitably there will still be concerns....
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Yes, why not? I'll be frank - I wasn't aware that it is illegal.

    Your womb, do what you like with it. If anyone tries to twist that into pro-abortion sentiment, I shall personally bugger them new subwoofer.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    Your womb, do what you like with it.
    I totally agree. If someone wishes to rent your womb, so be it, why not. Id glady sell my sperm so why not have girls sell their wombs.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Speaking as a girl, I think it's a bit rich for a guy to go on about how "Child-birth should be a loving, stimulating experience between a potential mother and father". In real terms, childbirth has nothing to do with the father, only with the mother. And I imagine it's fairly offensive to women who can't give birth to suggest that they're not "doing it right," or that they can't have a real bond with their child because they didn't give birth to them, or whatever.

    Frankly, you can hire vaginas, so what's the real difference?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Yeah I think it should. Tbh I looked into surrogate motherhood out of interest after a friend told me he and his partner were thinking about it. It's a long period of time to 'do a good deed' for with quite a large impact on the surrogate mothers body, I think a little financial incentive would attract more women into it.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    It is illegal to make "excessive" payments to surrogate mothers [Surrogacy Arrangements Act], but in reality, the courts are wary of intervening in consensual arrangements between the surrogate and the commissioning couple.

    Surrogates are only meant to be compensated for the reasonable costs of carrying a fetus to birth, .e.g. 10k, perhaps? In reality, payments are much higher.

    In my opinion, commercial surrogacy should be made lawful. It's grossly offensive to women to argue against its commercialisation. Plus, if commercial surrogacy was lawful, I think the amount of disputes that arise from such arrangements (which are admittedly low) would decrease further.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by e-lover)
    robs the woman of the experience of pregnancy
    If she had medical problems (which is usually the case), the 'exeperience of pregnancy' could kill her. Hence the need for a surrogate. Also some women may not want the 'experience of pregnancy'. Perhaps they are career women who do not want to take 9 months from work. These women could enter into commercial contract with other women. Like an employment contract.

    (Original post by e-lover)
    and the couple of the emotional gain they feel when expecting a child.
    They still get that experience of 'expecting'.

    (Original post by e-lover)
    And how can we be certain the surrogate mother will want to give her child?
    By a legally enforcable employment contract. Enforcable by specific performance if needs be.

    (Original post by e-lover)
    And making it commercial makes me feel sick. I would personally move country if it ever got legalised her. I dont want my kids growing up with such 'enterprise'.
    Why does it make you feel 'sick'? We use our bodies in labour all the time. That is what employment is essentially about.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I think the idea has potential.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tufts)
    By a legally enforcable employment contract. Enforcable by specific performance if needs be.
    I agree with everything else you said, except this. I think enforcing such a contract by specific performance would be wrong. No, I think damages is the best option in such a scenario.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jelkin)

    Frankly, you can hire vaginas, so what's the real difference?
    That's also the analogy Dworkin made.

    So in theory, those in favour of legalising prostitution, should also be in favour of commercial surrogacy.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by facebook)
    I agree with everything else you said, except this. I think enforcing such a contract by specific performance would be wrong. No, I think damages is the best option in such a scenario.
    The courts have ordered specific performance in surrogacy cases before.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jelkin)
    Speaking as a girl, I think it's a bit rich for a guy to go on about how "Child-birth should be a loving, stimulating experience between a potential mother and father". In real terms, childbirth has nothing to do with the father, only with the mother. And I imagine it's fairly offensive to women who can't give birth to suggest that they're not "doing it right," or that they can't have a real bond with their child because they didn't give birth to them, or whatever.

    Frankly, you can hire vaginas, so what's the real difference?

    Exactly what I was thinking. Except for the "rich for guy" bit. Stupid for anyone to say, regardless of gender! And how is child-birth an experience for a "potential mother"...I think if her vagina is coughing out a mini-human she's pretty much all mother, potential has past.

    I agree with what facebook said about it basically happening even though techn. the 'payment' is only supposed to cover expenses, as it were.

    I think this thing is pretty common in America though. I've also heard about ads for adoption in America. I remember there was an article in the Guardian a few years ago about the "baby market" and the terrible thing was black babies were so much cheaper than the perfect Aryan looking child. V morally reprehensible.

    Rent a womb? Hmmm...well, men sell their sperm (I think). And as we've discuessed there's already 'payment' on the go for a 9 month womb lease. But tbh, I think where they can, infertile couples tend to find a surrogate who knows them well and who is a good friend/part of the family, and i think this would be anyone's first choice. ALthough it would be funny to see women walking around in the summer, with tank tops on, WOMB FOR HIRE scrawled in biro across their stretch-ready stomachs. I dunno, it's a difficult situation. But generally, where possible, I think people should do their baking in their own ovens, so to speak.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tufts)
    That's also the analogy Dworkin made.

    So in theory, those in favour of legalising prostitution, should also be in favour of commercial surrogacy.
    Indeed ... although admittedly I'm not a fan of prostitution. But not for the sort of reasons that would apply to this issue.

    I just don't see what's grotesque about it - most women would want to give birth to their own children. It wouldn't be like having a ready meal instead of cooking from scratch.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    So would commercial surrogacy enhance women's liberation or hinder it?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tufts)
    So would commercial surrogacy enhance women's liberation or hinder it?

    Hinder I would say. Because once again it transforms women & their bodies into commodities. Which is in itself dehumanising. Dehumanisation, is I would say, antithecal to liberation.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Enhance I would say. Restricting a womans rights is dehumanising. So let women have the choice to commoditise themselves.
 
 
 
Poll
Brexit: Given the chance now, would you vote leave or remain?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.