Surrogate babies stranded in Ukraine

lawred2

walshb wrote: »

Are you also anti egg donation for women who cannot conceive naturally?

Nope

walshb wrote: »

What does it matter where or who for surrogacy?

kinda does really yeah - that's the whole fu(king point

walshb wrote: »

They got their dream off a surrogate in a foreign country. Big deal..

well as long as they are happy

walshb wrote: »

I see from another post that you wouldn’t object if the surrogate was a relative or friend?

100%

Alrigghtythen

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Yes. Because it involves the life a child, not just the sperm and egg donors and womb-for-rent.

Should we stop drug addicts and poor people having children too? That involves the life of a child

PyreOfHellfire

Alrigghtythen wrote: »

Should we stop drug addicts and poor people having children too? That involves the life of a child

Therein lies the rub. Be interesting to hear the response.

Portmanteau

"Scummy c*nt" because of posting something on the internet?

Expressing concern because their poverty forces them into it is just the preserve of "liberals"? I'd say plenty of conservative folk - particularly of a religious persuasion - would disagree.

It's a difficult situation to be in but they do choose it, even if it's shaped by their circumstances. The adopters being able to turn down a baby of not all boxes are ticked, is concerning though. And it could be awfully damaging psychologically if the mother regrets agreeing to surrogacy and then what she has to go through when giving her baby up.

jam_mac_jam

Alrigghtythen wrote: »

How much would a woman have to be worth before she can choose to be a surrogate. Only women who earn over 50,000?

Nobody should be allowed do it for profit. Hence why you have to go to Ukraine. Most countries do not allow it.

Nobody who earns 50k is going to do it unless for their family.

Portmanteau

Alrigghtythen wrote: »

How much would a woman have to be worth before she can choose to be a surrogate. Only women who earn over 50,000?

Who implied that?

Giselle Incalculable Perpetrator wrote: »

I actually wonder how people who take part in those baby mills justify it to themselves.

What do they tell themselves to make it seem like this is an OK thing to do?

Desperation for a baby I guess. Incredible anger from some in favour of them here though.

Alrigghtythen wrote: »

Should we stop drug addicts and poor people having children too? That involves the life of a child

I think the charity in the US that pays drug addicts to have their tubes tied is doing an ideal thing. The fewer babies born with heroin/crack cocaine/methamphetamine addiction, the better. Not something that should be enforced though, no.

the_syco

ceadaoin. wrote: »

I hope they can be reunited with their parents soon

I wonder what happens if they die from COVID whilst in isolation after they arrive into Ireland? Do the parents get a refund from the organisation, or does the company wash their hands of liability once they put the child on a plane?

august12

Treppen wrote: »

Bit of a straw man argument there.

Oh look at other things that are bad so it makes this equally bad which...is good?

Where did I say that, I guarantee a lot pontificating here are wearing designer branded clothes made in factories with appalling exploitation/working conditions, that was my point.

walshb

lawred2 wrote: »

100%

So if a woman can’t get a friend or relative to be their surrogate, that’s it? Door closed?

Why should it matter that a stranger carries your baby?

For some this may be the more preferred option. Strictly “business,” and nothing personal.

I don’t know, but if it was me I think I’d rather it be a stranger. Removes any possible personal feelings or possible fallings out (related to the surrogacy or just general falling out) etc..

lawred2

walshb wrote: »

So if a woman can’t get a friend or relative to be their surrogate, that’s it? Door closed?

Why should it matter that a stranger carries your baby?

For some this may be the more preferred option. Strictly “business,” and nothing personal.

I don’t know, but if it was me I think I’d rather it be a stranger. Removes any possible personal feelings or possible fallings out (related to the surrogacy or just general falling out) etc..

That all hinges on whether the stranger is a genuinely willing participant in your transaction.

For me; to rest easy on the assumption that all these Ukranian women do freely and willingly enter in to these arrangements requires a large degree of abandoning your senses.

ceadaoin.

walshb wrote: »

So if a woman can’t get a friend or relative to be their surrogate, that’s it? Door closed?

Why should it matter that a stranger carries your baby?

For some this may be the more preferred option. Strictly “business,” and nothing personal.

I don’t know, but if it was me I think I’d rather it be a stranger. Removes any possible personal feelings or possible fallings out (related to the surrogacy or just general falling out) etc..

Its not just "carrying your baby" is it though. Its gestating and creating another human being over 9 months and then possibly risking their life and suffering life long injury and trauma to give birth to a child who will be immediately separated from its mother. How can that be "nothing personal" ffs

Some of the language around this issue is completely dehumanizing and nothing more than an attempt to reduce these women to simply "wombs" and their babies to "products".

walshb

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Its not just "carrying your baby" is it though. Its gestating and creating another human being over 9 months and then possibly risking their life and suffering life long injury and trauma to give birth to a child who will be immediately separated from its mother. How can that be "nothing personal" ffs

Some of the language around this issue is completely dehumanizing and nothing more than an attempt to reduce these women to "wombs" and nothing more and their babies to "products"

What are you talking about?

Are you anti surrogacy?

You have gone on a rant there explains what surrogacy is. I am well aware what it is...

I simply said I would choose a stranger to carry my child over a friend/relative..

walshb

lawred2 wrote: »

That all hinges on whether the stranger is a genuinely willing participant in your transaction.

For me; to rest easy on the assumption that all these Ukranian women do freely and willingly enter in to these arrangements requires a large degree of abandoning your senses.

Fair enough.

If women are being forced against their will to carry children, then that is another issue. Was Rosanna’s surrogate one such woman?

lawred2

walshb wrote: »

Fair enough.

If women are being forced against their will to carry children, then that is another issue. Was Rosanna’s surrogate one such woman?

Lay your bets.

Estimates are that the majority of operators in the Ukraine are unregulated and not operating legally.

I know what I'd be betting on.

I completely understand how the couple involved would seek to convince themselves that all was good and all parties were willing.. that's an entirely understandable human thing to do. Doesn't necessarily make it the case though.

You create a market for this in a country with known issues with organised crime, with a lack of regulation and a plentiful supply of poor women - what do you think is the end result?

Tea drinker

Gatling wrote: »

It shouldn't be allowed ,I've defended Ukraine and it's dealing with the russian occupation of their territory for years now on here,

But this is shocking to see ,I've been following the story for a few weeks now ,it's actually looks something akin to Catholic mother and baby homes here in the 1950s onwards selling babies to couples under the guise of adoptions ,
This is industrial scale surrogacy and should not be allowed full stop

Their body their choice.

sabat

Tea drinker wrote: »

Their body their choice.

It's not just "their body" though is it? It's someone else's too, ie the child.

The fact that it's through surrogacy doesn't mean the child will be less loved or cared for. That's very important here. The baby who is born will be very wanted.

The welfare of the surrogate of course does matter. After all she is the person carrying the pregnancy. I don't think it's a black and white issue at all.

Portmanteau

sabat wrote: »

It's not just "their body" though is it? It's someone else's too, ie the child.

And how much of her choice is it really.

statesaver

It's rich people renting out poor women's wombs.

august12

So is the consensus here, there should be no surrogacy,

statesaver

august12 wrote: »

So is the consensus here, there should be no surrogacy,

Yes.

It's rich people renting out poor women's wombs.

ceadaoin.

walshb wrote: »

What are you talking about?

Are you anti surrogacy?

You have gone on a rant there explains what surrogacy is. I am well aware what it is...

I simply said I would choose a stranger to carry my child over a friend/relative..

My point was that the act of growing and birthing a child (not simply "carrying your baby" as you say) is by definition personal and could never truly be just a business transaction. The move towards making it such is disturbing and turning human beings into products.

And now because of surrogacy being turned into an industry, churning out babies for profit, there are going to be possibly thousands of traumatized babies stuck without parents for the foreseeable future.

Tea drinker

statesaver wrote: »

Yes.

It's rich people renting out poor women's wombs.

An increasing number of couples can't conceive or go full term so it's a lot more nuanced than people wanting to avoid stretch marks.
So just because you find it distasteful you would close an avenue for childless couples. If those girls want to rent their womb - fine.

Limpy

Its sad someone has to sell a child for profit.

Its a bad business to be running. The owner's of this company are there to make profits off desperate people on both sides.

statesaver

Tea drinker wrote: »

An increasing number of couples can't conceive or go full term so it's a lot more nuanced than people wanting to avoid stretch marks.
So just because you find it distasteful you would close an avenue for childless couples. If those girls want to rent their womb - fine.

You can't always get what you want from life.
You seem to have no problem with poor women in poor countries renting their bodies to rich people for babies.

mvl

No, I don't think that commodification of the womb is ok. I've no sympathy for families involved in this situation neither.
But, if countries like France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and Switzerland ban surrogacy now - do wonder what would be the future within EU ...

Small curiosity - are these babies Ukrainian citizens by birth now ?

Tea drinker

statesaver wrote: »

You can't always get what you want from life.
You seem to have no problem with poor women in poor countries renting their bodies to rich people for babies.

You don't know if the parties are rich or poor, so stop framing it like that.
People are all for personal choice as long as it's not something that offends your sensibilities, then a far less liberal approach appears.

Mike3287

walshb wrote: »

So if a woman can’t get a friend or relative to be their surrogate, that’s it? Door closed?

Why should it matter that a stranger carries your baby?

For some this may be the more preferred option. Strictly “business,” and nothing personal.

I don’t know, but if it was me I think I’d rather it be a stranger. Removes any possible personal feelings or possible fallings out (related to the surrogacy or just general falling out) etc..

Strictly business

Personal feelings

Listen to yourself man!

These girls deserve to live a normal life, this ain't normal

Would you be happy for your daugther who you worked all your life for to do this with her life?

Is that who you would want her to become

A womb for the rich

The daughter you took to preschool holding her hand, the daughter you took to ballet, to basketball training, to a breakfast in a nice restaurant before her first day in college, the daughter you drove to her first interview, walked down the aisle.

Would you want your daughter carrying twins every few years from 18 to 35 because she had no other way to make €5000 a year and looking back on her life at 50 years old thinking what have I done.

You'll probably reply

Life is not fair, it never will be with attitudes like yours.

SusieBlue

sabat wrote: »

So let me get this straight, we've got the daughter of a has-been cornball singer who came to public attention by posing naked in a pornographic magazine then gobbling Johnny Ronan's pirate cock for a free trip to Morocco. She marries the son of former Garda Richard Quirke who operates a quasi-legal casino on O'Connell St. Then, using money bled out of Dublin's slot machine addicts, they travel to the far east of Europe to rent a poor woman's body for nine months then remove the newborn infant from her arms. All the while she has been updating the public on social media about how much of a struggle her personal "journey" was.
Upon their return they are given a slot on the country's most popular television show where we are virtually compelled to applaud them, idolise them even.

She had 14 miscarriages over the course of 4 years prior to going down the surrogacy route, you forgot that bit in your little synopsis.
There is also no evidence that she used one of these baby farms, to be honest I would imagine someone with her profile would completely avoid that sort of set up because the backlash if it was every made public would destroy her reputation.
They would have the money & means to do this without taking advantage of impoverished women.

Fertility issues effect 1 in 6 Irish couples, I don’t agree with these ‘rent a womb’ type corporations but the laws and options regarding adoption in this country make it so difficult for couples to go down that route that it’s pretty much non existent. This isn’t an uncommon problem, unfortunately.

I think it’s just sad all round, for all involved.

statesaver

Tea drinker wrote: »

You don't know if the parties are rich or poor, so stop framing it like that.
People are all for personal choice as long as it's not something that offends your sensibilities, then a far less liberal approach appears.

Ukraine is not a rich western country. People went there to exploit poor women's wombs.

I'm all for personal choice as long as it's not rich people renting poor women's bodies.