https://www.huffingtonpost.com/sharon-greenthal/social-surrogacy-a-scary-_b_5179121.htmlAny opinions on this??
Personally, I feel that this is taking vanity too far. Parenting requires sacrifice, and I wonder how these ladies will do with the future sacrifices that will be required of them.
Also, there are plenty of women that need a surrogate for actual medical reasons, and I would hate to think that they might miss the opportunity to have a child because surrogates chose the highest bidder. I know that surrogacy generally involves a monetary transaction, but I would hope that someone who chooses to be a surrogate develops a bond with the family and knows that they are truly helping a family that otherwise couldn't grow their family.
Re: Social Surrogacy
Seems pretty f'ed up to me.
I remember being devastated when my RE told me I only had a 5% chance of getting pregnant even w IVF. I guess pregnancy isn't everyone's cup of tea, but it was pretty amazing and miraculous for me... Even the crappy parts!
Explain to me why it is "HORRIBLE" to recognize that there are families that cannot have children without the help of a surrogate.
Also, I think it says something about our society that some women feel that there would/could be career reprocussions if they chose to become pregnant.
#LOLFITMAMA
That said I do think being pregnant with your own child is still the ideal, best case senerio. I know it's not the only senerio but in my mind, for me, it's the top choice.
It gets really hard to judge people though because you never know what their situation is or their real motives.
For everyone arguing that some women have careers where they can't lose a single day for pregnancy, I'm sure that is true, but in those cases I would have to agree that if your career is that strict and that important to you, which is fine, but maybe raising a child right now, pregnant or surrogate, isn't the right decision.
I think if it's truly for vanity, avoiding getting fat, having stretch marks etcetera, then that's just not cool in my book- but if other factors are in play then surrogacy is fine.
#LOLFITMAMA
I understand what you and @CFox816 are saying about career repercussions BUT I think that is part of the issue here. I totally believe that men and women are equal, and there should be no repercussions for ANYONE to choose to have a child career wise. I think there needs to be a societal shift in that family becomes MORE important than careers for both men and women. I realize that it may just be a pipe dream, but our society struggles so much over "work/life balance," and it really is sad.
That being said, although women and men are equal, they are NOT the same. EQUAL =/= IDENTICAL. Women bear children, it is a biological fact. So saying that men never have to take time off like women to do so is pretty obvious. I realize that our society is trying very hard to make sure that all of the differences between men and women are wiped out, but that is a mission that will be impossible to accomplish.
I think instead of expecting men and women to be the SAME, we should embrace our differences and work to create a society in which those differences are celebrated, acknowledged, and never held against either sex.
My point is that as a society we have created this situation in which women can't/won't/shouldn't/there would be repercussions (whatever the situation) take the time to have a baby (and recover) from their careers. I find that sad that women are in that situation (assuming it is not for vanity's sake.) I think all women should have the freedom and latitude to accomplish this biological function without the negative repercussions. Assuming that all of these women are in the situation that their income and quality of life would be negatively impacted by having a child themselves, then no, I don't think they wouldn't be good parents. But, if they are simply doing it for vanity's sake because they don't want stretch marks then I stand by my questioning of their willingness to sacrifice for they children and the use of a surrogate that otherwise might be used by someone with an actual need.
ETA: QUOTE FAIL
I also question how much time these parents will have to give to these children. If your career is *that* important and *that* demanding what happens when your child gets sick at school? Has a school play? A soccer game? Could you take a family vacation? I guess I see a difference between having a career and being married to your career. You can have a career and be a great parent but I personally think it must be difficult to give 100% to each 100% of the time.
Obviously if a woman chooses this route for other reasons then all that is irrelevant. I absolutely love babies and love being pregnant, but I also have bad anxiety and worry about loss and being sick like crazy. I can see how someone would be fearful enough to choose to have someone else carry but if they've never had a child how would they know? Part of me is sad that women are voluntarily choosing to miss such an amazing time without ever having experienced it. Since I don't know these women and their entire stories I can't judge them on their choice and I would never say they'll be terrible parents but I think this is just another example of how me me me our society has become.
Here's the thing... I had two really rough pregnancies and if we do ever have another child, it would not be carried by me. (we are thinking adoption right now) However, when you say that having a surrogate would only create a solution for a few days you are being incredibly naive. First of all, I would assume that just because the mother is not the one carrying the baby, that she and probably the significant other would want to be at dr. appts and the birth.
Second, I was put on strict bedrest at 34 weeks with my first due to IUGR and again on bedrest at 32 weeks with my second due to PIH and Pre-E. So most of my FMLA was used up before I even gave birth both times.
As for the debate about how jobs should be more accommodating/understanding re: leave
When my second was diagnosed with reflux and was choking and turning blue and not gaining weight and couldn't get cleared for daycare, my job decided that they needed to fill my position and therefore I had to resign. I COMPLETELY support my boss in that decision.
They had a temp when I was out, sure, but my files needed an experienced person who could really dedicate themselves and knew what they were doing. I am all for equality in the workplace and I think that it is completely possible and admirable for a woman to be an incredibly successful career woman and a mom. However, I don't agree that my co-workers or my boss should have to pick up the slack or that my clients should suffer or not have the best service because I chose to have a baby and that baby was sick.
I stand by what I said which was simply that if work allowed no person time at all, and that was the reason for considering a surrogate, then I think that woman needs to consider the big picture before deciding to have kids at that time.
For what it's worth I work full time and am gone a lot as well, I acknowledge that I'm making choices in my life balance, I value my career and applaud other women that do as well.
I hate to think I'm making you feel badly for your choices
https://www.asrm.org/uploadedFiles/ASRM_Content/News_and_Publications/Practice_Guidelines/Committee_Opinions/recommendations_for_practices_utilizing_gestational_carriers_nonmembers.pdf
We obviously have very different opinions on this subject, but I think I will stick with what the VAST majority of the medical community promotes. Hell, in some states it is even illegal to pay a surrogate anything above and beyond what the actual medical costs are.
Some states ban it all together! Some recognize the surrogate as the legal mother regardless of any contracts. Get pissed all you want, I didn't make the laws.
Edit: Andplusalso the original article wasn't about all surrogates... it was about PAYING surrogates upwards of $100,000 to carry a baby for a woman WITHOUT a medical need. I am not against the use of surrogates for medical reasons at all, but even in those situations there is monetary compensation.
Adoption normally means there is no biological connection.
I agree that those in it for the money will seek out those willing to pay the most. I am not against the normal surrogate/parent agreement. I agree that there are women that will do it for free. That is not the situation I am against.
(I'd like to add that I'm not trying to be flippant about how strongly someone feels about having a child or minimize how those feel who are unable to have one)
LOLZ
I am pretty sure my friends and family would agree it's NONE OF THEIR DAMN BUSINESS. Then again I'm not surprised you care SO much about the personal nature of how other people form their families considering you care so much how someone likes their bacon. Just sayin...
My family thinks IVF is murder and quite frankly the vast majority of the world is fairly ignorant about infertility and/or third party reproduction, so I don't give a flying fuck what my family thinks. If I were a neurosurgeon or attorney or had a career where I traveled frequently, you better believe I would at least consider a gestational carrier.
And nobody has touched on this yet, but let's not forget that the intended gestational carriers ultimately have the final say in whose embryos they choose to carry or not. If a GC agrees to the arrangement, and the IPs are ok with it, who the hell are you to judge?
#LOLFITMAMA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXNF60HX8iw
HIS BODY was facing this way...but his HEAD...
#LOLFITMAMA