I was just thinking. What do you think of surrogate mothers? This is a process where a woman can't physically carry a pregnancy to term because of some medical condition so one of her close female relatives or friends volunteers to do it for her. Basically having a baby for someone else who isn't able to. There is the implicit agreement that the child will be handed over to the parents as soon as she or he is born and the surrogate mother has no right to the child. I think this is a very interesting thing, but probably is very emotionally confusing to all parties involved. With advances in fertility technologies a surrogate mother can carry a child to term who has no genetic relation to her whatsoever. So the pregnancy becomes a sort of extreme intense babysitting. I think that this is confusing enough with one of your friends or relatives, but the issue gets a bit tricky when you consider hiring a person to be a surrogate mother for your child. There are no laws that govern surrogate mothers and so if someone hires a surrogate mother there are no contracts that either person can sign in order to give the person the right to the baby once it is born. Basically the surrogate has to give her word and that's all that the parents can ask for.

Do you think that there should be laws governing surrogate mothers? Do you think it should be legal to hire surrogate mothers? (I don't think they are right now, but I'm not sure) Could you ever be a surrogate mother for love or money?

Yes, I think there should be laws governing surrogate mothers. The people who are going to raise the child put a lot of money into conceiving it -- especially if they are a couple who can use one of their own eggs...that's incredibly expensive. There are emotional drawbacks to the arrangement all around -- the surrogate mom has to carry a baby to term that she knows she won't be able to keep, and the people intent on raising the baby risk the mother changing her mind and deciding she wants joint custody, especially if it's the surrogate mom's egg (well, only then, really...I can't see what claim she'd be able to hold over it if it wasn't her egg).

I think it should be legal to hire a surrogate mom. If a lesbian couple wants a biological child, they can go to a sperm bank. Two men should have the same sort of option (well, ideally both types of couples should both be able to adopt...but we obviously don't live in an ideal world, so that's not always an option for them ). Although, I'd have to say....if it's a straight couple who can afford to hire a surrogate mom and pay all those medical expenses in the first place -- my opinion would be that they should just adopt, because obviously they have the financial ability to. But, of course, the option of hiring a surrogate mom should still be open to them as well.

I couldn't be a surrogate mother physically, so that last question doesn't really apply to me...but, if I was physically able, I don't know if I could handle the emotional impact of it. I don't think I could handle doing it for money, but for love I might, if it wasn't my egg. I could see myself doing that for one of my sisters or my best friend if I was able to.

I'm not familiar with surrogate mothers or the techniques involved, but isn't adoption a better answer all around?

There are already too many sweet parentless children out there.
<3

I agree... some people become frustrated with the adoption process which can take a very long time, or they want to have a child that has their own genetic makeup for a variety of reasons. Some people just dont' want to adopt period. It is sad but for that reason should people be forced to adopt and make surrogate mother's illegal? With surrogate mothering you know who the mother or your child is, you have your child the day s/he's born instead of wondering how many foster homes she was shuffled around, you can make sure of the mother's health etc etc etc. Basically you get a lot more control over the birth of your child.

I'd agree with you on that, Atari....but well, like I mentioned before, for gay couples that isn't always an option. In fact, it seldom *is* an option. It's really hard for them to get approval to adopt a child. If only the laws were different...then there would be a lot more happy homes for those kids. But, until that point...surrogate mothering is probably their best option if they want children. And I'm sure straight couples who choose that path have their reasons as well...and I'm editing this cause Jaq just snuck in here and explained those reasons before I hit post reply.

I dont have a problem against it, but i personally wouldnt be a surrogate mother or ask anyone to be one for me. (Maybe because i havent been in that situation before and hopefully will never be)...
In all honesty if i were a surrogate mother i know that i wouldnt be able to give up the baby whether or not it was my own egg being fertilised... The fact that i would have had a human growing inside me and then having to give it away would mess me about emotionally on a drastic level and i dont think that, that is something that i would be able to handle... Therefore i dont support the idea of surrogocy, but if that is what people clearly want, then who am i too judge them...

Hmmm, that should make sense?!

while i agree that adoption would be preferable, as jaq said- it can take years to be aproved.

lending out my body for money... it's just not something i'd do. but i'd be more than willing to be a serogate for someone i care about. and i don't think that giving up the kid would be too much of a problem for me as i don't have a lot of maternal instincts. don't get me wrong, i love kids, and i'd still want to be involved in the kids life, but i just don't wanna be a mommy. i'd be perfectly happy as an aunt or something.

why do you ask jaq?

Hmm I"m not to sure I would agree with people being able to hire someone to carry the child. I can think of alot of bad things that could come of that. What if some girls decided to make it their way of life. It could cause serious health problems, not only for them, but for the children they carry. If I remember correctly, to stay healthy a women should only have a child once every three years I believe. So I can see problems with women having a child every 9 monthes for an extended period. That being my opinion I wouldnt say that it shouldnt be allowed, people can make their own choices.
Personally if I choose to have someone be a surrogate for me, I would want them to be close. The person will more then likely have a connection to the child, and should be able to atleast see/interact with the child. It would also probably slim the chance of them refusing to hand the kid over once it was born.

I dunno I think that paying some to carry children is just an all around bad idea. But I wouldnt go around trying to stop them from doing so.

As for if I would do it. Not for money I wouldnt. But if a really close friend of mine or say my sister asked me, i would give it alot of consideration, and probably would.

i'm with you on the whole medical risk thing, however if it were regulated, then you could insure that the surrogates only had one child every 2-3 years and be certain that they are healthy before hand.

i'm also betting that surrogates would be very expensive and therefore not in high demand- making it difficult to make a career out of it.

Well that's a good question, jic, I'm glad you asked.

A couple of very good friends from high school that both you and I know are physically incapable of bearing children. I've talked to both of them and during high school we talked a bit about surrogacy. I was just thinking about it this morning and I think that if either of them ever asked me to be a surrogate mother I would be able to do that for them.

I don't know if I could do it for money though. I don't think I could sleep well at night knowing that my body was being rented out. Also I wouldn't go through the pain or fear of medical complications if it wasn't for someone I loved.

agreed.

though i feel it would be only fair for them to pay for the extra groceries!

There aren't, to my knowledge, professional surrogate mothers. A surrogate mother is, I think, almost always or always a relative or close friend of the people who need one.
Under UK law, a baby belongs to the mother who birthed it, regardless of the form of insemination used or anything else. Nor can the mother hand responsiblity for the child over beforehand - that can only be done after the birth, at which point the surrogate may be having second thoughts about it.

I would never be a surrogate mother. I dont want children of my own and wouldnt give birth to any one elses, no matter how close they were or how much i loved them. As much as i dislike children, i would probably get attatched to the paracite.
It would also stratch my tattoo all out of shape.

but anyone who is fit and willing to surrogate for a ralative or friend should be able to, im not sure about the stranger thing.

I also believe adoption is a better choice but i can understand potential parents wanting their own child.