An issue

Quote:

---

What would happen if the child is born with a disability? Will the infertile parents accept the child whole heartedly? Will the surrogate be blamed for the child's disability?

---

That was a very relevant question you raised there, Roshan. Surrogacy is all fine when things go well...but as you have beautifully pointed out, what happens when there is a disability - physical or mental? If a mother has borne the child herself, she might feel compelled to love the child, no matter how the child is born, but would she be willing to lavish the same care if the child were "not normal"? Or would the mother that gave birth be burdened with the child? I wonder what they do - write out contracts and stuff when they decide to go for surrogacy?

I think the women who are willing to "rent out their wombs" and their families must be made aware of these possibilities. Unfortunately in our country, a few thousand rupees can effetively make people blind to so many other aspects.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roshan

With the addition of a surrogate to reproductive environment the nature of motherhood, fatherhood, and the allocation of parental right and duties have all come into question.

---

I agree with you Roshan, the assignment of parental roles has undergone a sea change, with the advent of surrogacy. But then, the same thing happened with divorce and remarriage, with the introduction of new stepparents and not to mention the wealth of stepsiblings and half-siblings. :|

Speaking of confusing parental identities, let’s stop and compare the scenario with adoption for a moment –at the opportune time, when the parents decide to tell their child (surrogated or adopted) of the birth history, would you think it’d be easier for them to explain to the child that he/she is their OWN offspring borne in the womb of another willing woman or to tell the child that he/she was indeed born to some strangers? For a couple who are not comfortable with the idea of raising someone else’s child as their own, isn’t this an excellent opportunity of having a child who is genetically theirs?? How could we expect that EVERY infertile couple (regardless of whether the cause is the man/woman/both) SHOULD follow the adoption route? Isn’t it conceivable that a good proportion of the population of such couples would like to have their OWN child, willingly taking the huge RISK of having an extra member in the parenthood i.e., the surrogate??

Also, it is rather PRESUMPTUOUS to assume and REQUIRE that childless couple MUST adopt a child. It is not necessarily ‘evil’ to want to have one’s own biological child in place of an unknown stranger’s child. If so, even the fertile couples should stop having babies or trying to have babies and adopt the existing ones!!! After all, wouldn’t it signify to the adopted child that he/she was adopted because of LOVE and NOT just as a “LAST RESORT”? There is no perspective that is not without merit; regardless, I believe it is the prerogative of the couple involved to surrogate or adopt.

As Roshan mentioned, indeed there is a possibility that the baby might be born with congenital defects – due to variety of reasons. The biological parents might carry some dormant genes that get expressed in the next generation, they might have some medical conditions that results in a handicapped or otherwise unhealthy child, etc. The surrogate could be predisposed to some medical conditions, or on medication that may be contraindicated in pregnancy, malnourished during gestation, not provided with adequate care and suitable supplements such as folic acid (the lack of which causes certain birth defects) or a smoker/drinker (hopefully not DURING the pregnancy) and many, many other possible scenarios.

BUT, any couple who is willing to have a child by ANY means SHOULD be prepared for such outcomes. If not, they should not commit to such a process in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roshan

Giving away a child which is half hers is definitely a trauma.

---

Roshan, why would the child be ‘half hers’ – I thought we were discussing the specific type of surrogacy in which the ovum and the sperm come from the childless couple, NOT the kind where the surrogate undergoes AI, and her own ovum is used.
If you implied that the child is ‘half hers’ JUST because the embryo got implanted in her, what part of the child is actually her ‘contribution’? If science advances to the extent that the IVF embryos could be gestated in the lab using sophisticated ‘uterine models’ or simply incubators, would that be more acceptable than to have it live inside of a stranger, who may or may not stake a claim in the kid after it is born???

I am sure everyone understands that surrogacy is not some casual procedure. It is IMPERATIVE that both the surrogate and the expectant couple go though legal procedures and understand many of the unpredictable situations involved. In fact, even if someone in the family wishes to help out, it would be safe to say that, for the benefit of everyone involved, some legal procedure would have to be carried out. Also, the surrogate should be medically a good match (blood type, Rh factor, pre-existing medical conditions) for bearing the fetus to term and delivery.

I am not suggesting that the surrogate’s emotional attachment could be simply brushed aside. It cannot be stressed enough that the legitimate parentage should by established prior to even starting the procedure and the surrogate MUST understand that she is merely the ‘medium’ not the ‘source’. As Roshan has pointed out, it would be challenging for the family of the surrogate to accept the fact that the new baby will not belong in their family but that’s the whole construct of the system. If one cannot abide by that, it will surely end up in a disastrous situation.

Why does the involvement of money make something a commercial business transaction even if it is done with the UTMOST GOODWILL at heart? If it were so, we would have to outlaw the medical profession, the trade of curing people parading in the guise of service! If the surrogate herself is willing to be the womb for a woman who can’t bear a child in hers, there is no room for any other judgmental thought here.

In our society (SE Asia) it is a sad fact that a poor woman could be intimidated into or may force herself into being a surrogate for a measly sum, if it will alleviate her condition even briefly. That is totally a condemnable criminal act that has to be dealt with along the same lines as ‘organ trading’. THE WOMAN HERE IS MERELY THE VICTIM.

PP mentioned that wet nurses in old English novels were portrayed as hired help for women who can very well feed their babies themselves but wouldn’t do so because of their vanity. When talking about surrogating for money that analogy does not apply because the biological mother does NOT seek a surrogate for vanity reasons but only because she doesn’t have a choice. So I can’t blame the childless woman as a monster either; rather she is the victim succumbing to the pressures that characterize her as less than a woman for being infertile.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roshan

Whether or not surrogacy is commercialized, when set within the context of women’s inequality, it inevitably supports and reinforces the view that bearing and raising children is what being a woman is all about.

---

I have to agree with this Roshan, it is an inevitability we face as a species that propagate through sexual reproduction. :( I feel all women regardless of education and circumstance would judge themselves by this yardstick of motherhood that they innately think they OUGHT to embrace, at one point or another in their lifetimes. I don’t think that this is exclusively a societal double standard (as I used to before), probably it is so due to reinforcement by our own thoughts and actions, but predominantly it is a derivative of the inner dialogue with the essence of one’s self that flames this pervasive notion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cygnus

But then, the same thing happened with divorce and remarriage, with the introduction of new stepparents and not to mention the wealth of stepsiblings and half-siblings. :|

---

That's totally a different issue and has to be dealt separately. There's a famous quote which says - Two "wrongs" will never make a "right". :)

[quote]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roshan

Roshan, why would the child be ‘half hers’ I thought we were discussing the specific type of surrogacy in which the ovum and the sperm come from the childless couple,

---

I thought we were talking about surrogacy in general and that's how the discussion has to be. There are two types involved in surrogacy . The first is what you have mentioned above and the second is artificially inseminating husband's sperm into the surrogate. ( blah blah has already mentioned it clearly in his first message here) . That's why I raised the question asking whether an infertile husband would agree to inseminate sperms of an outsider into his wife's womb - in case she wants to bear a child.

As far as I know the method mostly adapted (specially in our part of world) is the second. In the first case the process if very fragile and only 10-20% formed result in actual pregnancy.

Quote:

---

Why does the involvement of money make something a commercial business transaction even if it is done with the UTMOST GOODWILL at heart?

---

I think I have clearly explained the commercialized surrogacy as opposed to altruism. In many cases brokers and middlemen are involved in the process and do you think they are doing it with utmost GOOD WILL?? Good will, altruism, compassion are all just 'saaljaapu' in many cases.

Quote:

---

In our society (SE Asia) it is a sad fact that a poor woman could be intimidated into or may force herself into being a surrogate for a measly sum, if it will alleviate her condition even briefly. That is totally a condemnable criminal act that has to be dealt with along the same lines as ‘organ trading’. [color=blue]THE WOMAN HERE IS MERELY THE VICTIM.

---

Yes exactly !! but are there any laws and regulations available to protect these poor women ? :roll:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cygnus

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roshan

Whether or not surrogacy is commercialized, when set within the context of women’s inequality, it inevitably supports and reinforces the view that bearing and raising children is what being a woman is all about.

---

I have to agree with this Roshan, it is an inevitability we face as a species that propagate through sexual reproduction. :(

---

Glad you agreed and for that matter no woman would disagree with the fact. :)

I am afraid Cygnus has rather misunderstood me. Even though I had the issue of wet nurses at the bottom of my mind I deliberately refrained from raising it for fear of crowding too many issues in the discussion. But when Cygnus raised it in the first place I came out with my associated thoughts about it. Jaiganes had mentioned the altruistic instinct in animal herds. Somewhat similar to that was my knowledge of aunts feeding another’s baby in a joint family at an emergency. But wealthy, fashionable English ladies employed wet nurses on a regular basis for, as Cygnus rightly put it, vanity. What Cygnus misunderstood is that I am critical of fertile women without any problem employing surrogate mothers to carry her baby. Nobody in their right senses will opt for surrogation if the wife is ok for childbearing- only women with weak uterus & a host of other reasons think about it. Women have not, God forbid, reached that height of vanity yet! Then why drag wet nurse issue into discussion, one might ask. Because childbearing involves so many intricate aspects which wise law cannot completely satisfy. I am not making monsters of anyone. Just analysing the pros and cons of an issue from various POV for which this forum has been very helpful as usual.

While some mentioned the trauma of the surrogate mother at parting with the baby & the necessity for subsequent counseling, I wished to point out the immediate physical problems also which are real serious ones not to be ignored. In it, I pointed out the baby also stands the risk of not growing into a healthy adult with sufficient stamina. In short, there are physical, mental, psychological complexities involved which should make couples opting for surrogation think well before deciding. If a woman consents to surrogate for monetary reason & not for altruism then it is purely commercialization of something-motherhood- which we have held precious, nay priceless, for centuries. That just rings in consonance with the trend of the era! And I, an old nagging granny, going about my habitual haranguing!

Somewhere in the discussion somebody wanted to know how husbands react to their wives being artificially inseminated with an outside donor’s semen.( Many infertility clinics resort to this). I have had this doubt for many years, knowing the conservative society we live in. I openly asked this to my doctor sister & one of my doctor nieces who have cognizance of this matter. They said women who come for fertility treatment come into 2 categories- 1. taking this treatment of artificial insemination without the knowledge of their husband or in-laws( does that come under marital dishonesty of a high degree?)- all they want is to be ridden of the stigma of infertility!2.women whose husbands( broad-minded or also desperate to face the situation of being issueless) mutely, confidentially consent to this treatment. This anxiety to have a baby at all costs, utilizing all the inventions available makes the childless couples in our families who remained so to the end stand out in stark contrast. A sea change in the mindsets & thinking patterns of society! A natural evolution!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pavalamani pragasam

1. taking this treatment of artificial insemination without the knowledge of their husband or in-laws( does that come under marital dishonesty of a high degree?)- all they want is to be ridden of the stigma of infertility!2.women whose husbands( broad-minded or also desperate to face the situation of being issueless) mutely, confidentially consent to this treatment. This anxiety to have a baby at all costs, utilizing all the inventions available makes the childless couples in our families who remained so to the end stand out in stark contrast. A sea change in the mindsets & thinking patterns of society! A natural evolution!

---

..

For the first case my opinion is that it amounts to marital dishonesty of a high degree.The woman involved is handing over to her husband,a child which is not his while he believes the opposite.Not many husbands will forgive their wives if they come to know about this at a later stage.I will not,for sure.

Marriage is a solemn establishment with mutual trust as the base.Such breach of trust can not be and should not be forgiven.I get married with out knowing whether my wife is fertile or not.I will take it if she is not and expects the same deal back.If she prefers to carry and give birth to a child which is not mine,with out my knowledge our marriage will not go further,not even a singlepoint further.

PP,

Good post once again and thanks for adding more weight to my - the somebody's views :D

It is at times such as these that you wonder, were our forefathers and foremothers ( just making sure the feminists are appeased, ok!!) had little to worry about! At least, they were not faced with such moral dilemmas!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blahblah

For the first case my opinion is that it amounts to marital dishonesty of a high degree.The woman involved is handing over to her husband,a child which is not his while he believes the opposite.Not many husbands will forgive their wives if they come to know about this at a later stage.I will not,for sure.

---

Whether it is done with or without the knowledge of the husband, as long as I'm concerned it is ethically and morally wrong. I hold the same opinion on surrogacy too !!

Looks like this discussion has now heated up to the right consistency, thanks to EVRYONE for their contribution!

Let me firstly relate a story that will help clear up why I am VEHEMENTLY supporting the right of the infertile couple to resort to surrogacy. I have personally known a young woman, about 25 at the time, originally from Ukraine, who was in the final stages of her doctoral program, married to a wonderful man, living in their own house in an affluent part of the city (Philadelphia). All she had left unfulfilled was her wish to have a baby. Now this couple tried to conceive for over a year and finally figured out that the girl was fine but the husband had a low sperm count (one of the reasons the MD said was could be due to the Chernobyl exposure :( ). They were shattered but then they had the monetary resources to go for IVF (each try costs about $10,000). She went though HELL, getting hormone shots to induce ovulation, had several miscarriages, physically and emotionally worn out, had to take a break from school. She was interning at a place where one of her subordinates was a woman from a lower social class, who had a son out of wedlock, and was currently pregnant with her second child through a new boyfriend!! :roll:

At work, ALL this girl could do was, constantly curse at the fact that she, who is very capable of raising children, had to go through immense heartache, when this lady who in her opinion did not deserve a child (for her wanton behavior and her economic status) was getting pregnant like it’s nobody’s business!! While this drama was unfolding, I was not only sympathetic to the girl but also EXTREMELY judgmental of the fact that she was throwing away nearly $50,000 in trying to get pregnant, when that money could help establish the life of an orphaned baby (heck, many orphaned babies) and that she was too narrow-minded and coldhearted to the plight of the children who are already here and need a home. After I moved, I haven’t heard the current status of what happened finally but then, now when I think back, I feel it wasn’t the right thing to do for me to judge her as a selfish person. She loved her husband and wanted to have a baby with his genes. She would go any length to make that happen. But to me it looked like she was oblivious to the sufferings of others.

Is it SO bad that someone wants a child of their own genetic make-up? All I see in this discussion is, we sit on a high horse and tell people to adopt children, but NOBODY answered my question of if one would adopt a child even without fertility issues????? After all, compassion is supposed to spring out of willingness, NOT when cornered into a situation of no choice, right? Querida, so aptly, raised the issue of adopting handicapped children and children who are older (over the ‘cutesy age’ she said). How many of us have the courage to do it? What about foster parenting? I don’t know if such a thing exists in our society, but in North America, people often enlist themselves with the social service agencies and provide temporary homes for children who are abandoned or orphaned due to a variety of reasons. This however is not without it’s own problems because we do hear incidents of abuse by the foster parents. Again, the other side of it, some foster parents actually legally adopt these children after a while of having them in the families and getting to know them well.

Roshan, I have presented my view of things as I see happening in the US. If in our part of the world, women bear their own children (by having her OWN ovum fertilized by donor sperm) for others (out of force or simply moneymaking deals) I CANNOT EVER ACCEPT THAT. Like Badri mentioned, why not do it the natural way and save some trouble of visiting clinics?? It is an ABSOLUTE insult to the mother bearing the child and motherhood in general.

Even a small visit to the physician here in the US, entails filling up of lengthy forms and listing prior medical history, not to mention signing several declarations of proof of health insurance, privacy and what not. In the case of a huge procedure like surrogacy, one would have to involve a whole team of lawyers to oversee the legal rights of everyone involved! So my understanding of the process is only based on the situation here NOT from India or anywhere else. I can’t believe middlemen and contractors are involved, which makes it sound utterly nauseating :(

About the point Roshan raised – sperm donation from an outsider so as to help infertile couple. Well, while I PERFECTLY understand the sentiments of men here who said they be dead against such an option…..let’s think about this issue in a different light, shall we? The child is biologically your wife’s, no matter if the sperm came from some other man. Shouldn’t it be EASIER to love this child than to love an adopted child, who is ENTIRELY some other set of parents’? By the same token, if a surrogate WILLINGLY (absolutely no coercion involved, to avoid interference from other factors) bears ‘half her’ child for an infertile woman, isn’t it easier for the woman to accept it than a total stranger’s child? (Of course, in our society, this would happen sooner because the husband’s sperm is considered a more important contribution than the wife’s ovum). Here I want to add one more detail, from the earlier story of the young woman going thru IVF – well, while at the fertility clinic, she met another couple originally from Ukraine, only in their case, the woman had a problem and this girl donated her ova to that couple so they can have a child. I cannot even begin imagine the kind of emotions charging through her, if the other lady bore a child with her help and she never gets that chance!!!! I sincerely hope that didn’t happen. All this talk about her, now I’m really gonna find out what happened finally. :)

I guess like I said before, if we dissect each perspective right down to its bare fundament, every one of them has a certain inalienable extent of validity.


But as PP pointed out, if the fertile woman, resorts to AI thru outsider sperm without the husband's knowledge - it is an utter breach of conjugal trust. There's simply no excuse for it. On the other hand, if the husband was fine and had a kid from an extramarital affair, should this woman accept that kid (let's say the mistress wants to abandon the kid) :?: I would say knowing our MCP society, that will be a resounding "yes!"
Why am I reminded of K Balachander's 'Sindhu-Bhairavi' and 'Kalki' here? :wink:

PP, also thanks for clearing up the ‘wet nurse’ issue. Of course, we can only HOPE that women won’t hire people to carry their babies, as they do to clean their houses, but there is NO telling what the future holds!! Now, if men could bear babies for their women, that’ll be an interesting turn of events…. (Predicting Shekhar running in here with a ‘blonking’ object borrowed from NM, of course!!!) :lol2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cygnus

but NOBODY answered my question of if one would adopt a child even without fertility issues????? [/color]

---

Why not? I am sure, many family these days adopt their second child,
or their first one(by refraining from having their own) for sheer want of rasing an orphaned child, and for doing some act useful to the society.

I don tknow how many of u are resident indians, if u are, YOU WOULD AGREE with me in this point, that thouth there is increase in cost of living, the affordability of citizen has also simultamously risen. thanks to the multinationals, and other foreign compaines firmly resting th eir foot in india, THE PAY SCALE has gone up.

Therefore, the idea of adopting and giving life to a child, NEED NOT BE BECAUSE OF FERTILITY ISSUES. I can point many examples.
And we dont have any answers for those who adopt their second child do we?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cygnus

After all, compassion is supposed to spring out of willingness, NOT when cornered into a situation of no choice, right?

---

What I spoke before answers it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cygnus

Querida, so aptly, raised the issue of adopting handicapped children and children who are older

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cygnus

(over the ‘cutesy age’ she said). How many of us have the courage to do it?

---

This I agree, needs more empathy, courage and a lorge heart. NO.
Not many do it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cygnus

if the fertile woman, resorts to AI thru outsider sperm without the husband's knowledge - it is an utter breach of conjugal trust. There's simply no excuse for it. On the other hand, if the husband was fine and had a kid from an extramarital affair, should this woman accept that kid (let's say the mistress wants to abandon the kid) :?: I would say knowing our MCP society, that will be a resounding "yes!" Why am I reminded of K Balachander's 'Sindhu-Bhairavi' and 'Kalki' here?

---

Well, there is no difference, whether it is a man or a woman.
Unfortunately, when infertility results in a woman, choices are more.
IF a man is having problems, COUPLE HAS TO LIVE WITH IT.
Now why cant they have surrgate fathers? (or faceless donar of sperm)
Not very easy to accept, like how its pointed out. (extramarital affair is BANNED to be thought from woman's point of view)

Being MC society, one has to go a long way in INDIA, to accept and redefine what is BREACH OF mutual COMMITMENT.

I would suggest ADOPTING a child, for couples who have no issues about showering love to the basic human kind. If u are prejudiced surrogate mom, dad, or any other method is suited.

One can also cosider living issueless. Its not a big deal after all..!