Advertisements
One can now arrange for babies to be born via surrogacy in India. Tonight there was a TV story on the program, "60 Minutes", about a gay couple who shopped on the internet, found a place in India that arranged for their donated sperm to be matched up with a donated egg (the gay couple could choose the egg donor) and a third woman who carried the baby twins in her womb and gave birth to the twins. Presto! For AU$40K made-to-order babies for those who can afford it and handy income for poverty-stricken egg donors/surrogate women who have a 'womb to rent'. Unfortunately there was virtually no coverage of voices of adoptees, only a mere hinting of the questions that the twins will have when they get older. And what precautions are in place to guard against further coercion of women - either to donate their eggs or become surrogate 'wombs for rent'? Then there are the underlying assumptions of "the right to procreate' overrides the rights of the child, the rights of the rich to purchase what they want from the poor, etc; While I'm not against gay adoptive parents, the disregard of the possible repercussions for the children in light of the economic laws of supply and demand make me cringe. Here's the article:[URL="http://sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com/article.aspx?id=816881"]http://sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com/article.aspx?id=816881[/URL] Liz Hayes: Two Men and Two Babies 22/05/2009 6:30:00 PM, Liz Hayes [URL="http://sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com.au/blog.aspx?blogentryid=413559&showcomments=true"]Next[/URL] [URL="http://sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com.au/img/2009/gdads_blog.jpg"]http://sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com.au/img/2009/gdads_blog.jpg[/URL] It used to be that "Delhi belly" meant something less than pleasant was on its way. Well not any longer.It could now mean you've made the ultimate decision, and hired a womb. An Indian woman whose taken on the job of giving birth to your child. India has now become a major player in the baby-making business providing everything you need. Donor sperm, eggs and wombs-for-rent can all be found under the one fertility clinic roof. I travelled to India to meet up with Peter and Trevor, a gay couple from Melbourne who had made the investment. Nine months before they'd begun the pregnancy process after purchasing eggs from a donor and engaging the services of a surrogate, at a Mumbai fertility clinic. They're now the proud, genetic fathers of twin girls. None of this is new, of course. In America, for hundreds of thousands of dollars you can do the same. In India, it's much cheaper and there are fewer rules about who gets to be a parent this way. Making babies is now something anyone can do. Single men and women, gay and straight, combinations of all kinds can sign up today! And if you're a man, you don't even have to turn up to make a "deposit". You can courier your frozen sperm to the clinic and it will take care of the rest. As long as you make the trip nine months later, and the bills are paid, that little bundle of joy is yours. Yes, yes, it is the ultimate Indian outsourcing industry. Women, so many of them, are prepared to sell their eggs or carry someone else's child for a fee. And there are plenty of banks of sperm. But, if you've ever been to India, it's not entirely a surprise. Poverty is so very real for many families that when the chance to make more money in nine months than most could make in nineteen years comes along, it's a no-brainer. The surrogates I met are young mothers with children of their own. The money they earn will make an enormous difference to their lives, although I got the feeling that giving birth to babies for gay couples wasn't high on their agenda. And their husbands took some convincing, too. Many didn't believe pregnancy was possible without sexual contact. But, once the birds and the bees of the test tube tango was explained, all was well. Still, surrogacy is often done in secrecy. Women don't usually want others to know and are afraid of the shame they may suffer for doing so. So they pretend the baby they're carrying is theirs and then, when it fails to come home with them, claim that the worst has happened. The baby has died. It's a complicated and emotionally charged issue for everyone. Dip your toe into the argument about the rights and wrongs of children brought into the world this way and prepare for a battle royal. I'm already suffering a nasty chaffing from the fence I know I'm straddling, but really, I don't know if this is a good or bad thing. Plenty will tell you that making babies this way doesn't lessen their commitment or love for their children. Quite the opposite. Perhaps it's because it's a business, I feel this unease. I'm not sure. What I am sure of is it's a reality and it isn't going away.
Like
Share
@ oceanica
Like many others adoptees I have some issues yes.
You probably think iam depressed 24/7 and lock myself up in a room or something.
Which iam not I got a life and I was also blessed with my adoptive parents which doesn’t mean everything is ok.
Unlike you they don’t tell me what I feel is wrong.
Which is a big problem with a lot adoptive parents.
If you want to talk about stereotypes, you fit that bill.
You didn’t judge my comment, you judged how I feel.
With all do respect who do you think you are ?
Telling me what I feel is wrong.
You can swing it every way you like to, but that’s what your doing.
Further more where did you see me say, I hate Indian people in general or that I hate or deny that part of myself ????
That I hate the country doesn’t mean I hate the people or myself.
The only one who is stereotyping and making assumptions here is you.
I’m not American ( was adopted by Europeans ) but the fact you try to prove your point by comparing it to Pearl Harbour is mind boggling and pretty twisted if you ask me.
And has got nothing do with this.
You think because you adopted a child that you’re an expert or something ?
That it entitles you to judge me ??
Of course you don’t have to agree with me, but telling some ones feelings are wrong is pretty arrogant.
No matter in what context you place it.
Is it your body that’s messed up thanks to religion and the social cast system over there ? I think I got more then enough right to feel what I feel.
Or is this a forum where your only allowed to post happy joy joy stories and feelings about adoption ?
Why is it that a lot of adoptive parents think, they can claim a moral high ground by thinking its all handy dandy.
And especially telling adoptees whatever they are feeling that it is wrong ?
It only shows how less you understand about adoptees in my opinion.
The thing about adoption is that a lot of feelings are contradictory; however the reasons doesn’t always have to be logical.
Because feelings are oftend not logical.
Advertisements
AFCA you are possibly being misunderstood because no one really believes that the literal physical country of India did anything to you. Surely you can understand how someone who is part Indian, whose parents are from India, would take offense to your statement about hating India. I'm sorry you have horrible associations with the country, but your issues with the country are obviously not with the physical country itself but something that happened to you because of decisions people in India made. That is why your blanket comment is so offensive.
Back to the original topic, do you guys think there is a difference between this type of thing and what Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban did to expand their family? Is the main issue that the children being created in the way the article discusses are not related biologically to the parents that raise them and people aren't thinking about the reprecussions of that, or is it that the poor in India seem to be being taken advantage of in this situation, or both? Or something else? I admit I'm really not sure how I feel about it...it's a little bizarre to process this early in the morning.
Sarah, A large part of my feelings on that story if I remember correctly (old post) is the potential impact on the surrogate from her family at any point in the future if they feel she caused them to lose face. We have had several honor killings here in Canada and it horrifies me and makes me very sad. The Indo-Canadian population is really trying to make changes and educate families but some are resistant to change. My community has a large population of Indo-Canadian families and I see both this and the racism they face from the white population and it really upsets me, it hits home when it is your neighbors and friends impacted physically and mentally. My assumption is that there are probably more frequent honor killings in India and carrying someone elses child may be enough of a trigger for it to happen. I have other concerns with surrogacy as well. Kind regards,Dickons
I think anywhere there is massive poverty and the opportunity to make a relatively large amount of money PLUS people with money willing to exploit those people...this kind of thing will happen.
I recently had a kidney transplant from a live donor--a friend who did it freely for no monetary gain--but I was surprised to see how many people from India were soliciting to sell their organs to Americans and Europeans for a price. It is illegal in this country but I guess it does happen in India. I am not comparing a kidney to a human child but I do see parallels.
BTW...my parents are in India right now, not renting wombs or buying kidneys...just soaking up the beautiful scenery and unique culture.
@ usisarah
I do agree with you, when I posted my first comment that I should have given it a little bit more explanation.
And like I said in my previous post, you don’t have to agree with me at all.
Nevertheless, I would never ever ever say that some ones opinion or feelings are ignorant or even worse blanked.
Or make any asumptions about anyone.
That’s the thing that really ticks me off.
I’m talking here about my experiences and the emotions that come with that.
Understanding in my view comes from both ways.
Further, more you not responding in-depth to anything I wrote.
By saying my statement is blanked after my explanation ( I already told more then I wanted ) you only prove that you don’t respect the way how I feel.
I really hope that if you ever adopt a child and he or she has questions or certain emotions you won’t ever tell your child that his or her feelings are blanked.
I certainly don’t agree with you two but I do respect your opinion and never ever call your comment ignorant or blanked.
But it seems this forum is no different like any other forum.
Where adoptive parents or people thinking about adopting think they know it better to tell us how we should feel or not.
And people wonder why many adoptees feel misunderstood.
And like I said in my last post.
The thing about adoption is that a lot of feelings are contradictory; however, the reasons doesn’t always have to be logical.
To me this only proves that don’t you know much about most adoptees but only see things from out of your perfect dream wish of forming a family.
I’m ending this discussion if you don't mind, because I don’t have the feeling I can bring my point across or that at least my opinion will be respected.
None the less, I sincerly wish you both and your ( future ) family (s) all the luck and bliss in the world.
Advertisements
AFCA,
If you want to think that the statement "Gosh I hate that country" isn't a blanket statement about India, then by all means go ahead. I wasn't trying to offend you or make things personal...just trying to point out that perhaps a more appropriate statement would have been "I hate that X is allowed to go on in India" or "I hate that X seems to be an accepted practice in India" or "I hate that certain groups are marginalized in India"
If it is wrong for me to think what you said was not ok, it is equally wrong to blast others and myself for feeling your statement was not ok. It's a two way street. My opinion on your statement has nothing to do with the fact that I'm American or that I happen to have looked into adoption when adding to my family. I certainly understand how one's personal experiences can mold their opinion on a variety of issues and you are certainly entitled to your opinion, whether or not it makes sense to anyone who hasn't walked in your shoes.
I think it's wrong because it is clearly taking advantage of folks who are poor. People are going there to have women carry their children because it's cheaper. I don't care if they money MEANS more to them b/c they are poor. They are still being asked to do something that risks their health and emotions to provide a service for less money. It's wrong.
There is a reason like port said, that you may not sell organs. Poor people would be the ones taken advantage of and their health would be put at risk for the money. And then those poor people waiting for an organ would never be able to compete. Wrong on all levels.
I think you're right Bethany. I wonder what you guys think about the idea when it's done in a situation that doesn't take advantage of poor people though. There are people who are not poor, who are educated, etc who choose to be a surrogate here in the US. I think that's usually done with the egg and sperm of the couple that will be taking custody of the baby. But what if there was a business in the states or other country for that matter where the women carrying the babies weren't being taken advantage of (for the sake of argument suppose they were volunteers with no motive...I know that's not how it happens) and the egg and sperm come from anonymous donors, so the child is not biologically related to the people taking custody of him/her. Does that happen? And if so, do you think the parents in that situation consider the fact that their child really is adopted and they should be sensitive to issues that could come up as a result of that?
Advertisements
Sarah, Yes, unrelated to the parents or the surrogate happen, they happen more often than you would expect. Anonymous anything when it comes to creating a living breathing human being is WRONG...on so many levels and on that point I will never ever change my mind. The lack of government oversight and laws related to protections of all parties especially the child scares me. It does not matter if a surrogate is involved or not, anonymous donation without any kind of documentation that is protected under statute and available is wrong. Expecting a clinic to make sure that they have adequate records that are never destroyed like those "floods" or "fires" that plagued all the maternity home records is laughable. To expect a clinic that has closed and sent their "files" for storage to be available to access in the case of emergency or by law providing equal rights or even due to 'good cause'...not going to happen. Kind regards,Dickons
About ten years ago I went through fertility treatments one after another. Many here will forever remember the daily injections, the hope and then the devasting negatives. I did IUIs, IVFs all negative. I then attempted not one but two failed domestic adoptions. One was a complete scam. I then went international with China and then ran into a much longer than expected wait and rule changes. I then switched to Guatemala and ultimately the program closed. In told I have spent over $100,000 to make my hope of becoming a mother a reality and it all failed. I was given the information regarding India's program. At the time for a cost of about $15,000 US (excluding travel) I could have done that too. As desperate as I was to become a mom I couldn't help but feel as though I would be exploiting another. I realize that the woman carrying my child would have received a financial benefit but as noted there is a significant stigma attached. I did not feel comfortable making that choice. For me I liken this to abortion - while I am not for it I do realize that there are people and circumstances in which that choice may be necessary. It is not up to me to judge them. I just hope that counseling is given. (As a side note I did eventually become a mother thru foster to adopt of 2 amazing little boys)
I honestly really don't agree with surrogates when it comes to the surrogate using her own eggs. It just seems unethical to me because there is too much room for people to get hurt.
Af far as a surrogate who uses the sperm and eggs of the couple, I don't really see a huge problem with it. I personally wouldn't do it if it involved paying someone. If I was married and we wanted a child together and a family member or friend offered to carry our child, I may take that into consideration.
I do think that insurance companies should pay to treat people with infertility. It is a health issue and if insurance covers medication for men to get an erection, it should cover men or women who need help with fertility.
I don't like that people who can't have bio kids have to pay so much to have a family. But even so, it wouldn't make it right to take advantage of others as in the case with Indian women.
Playing devil's advocate here...
How is a woman being a surrogate with her own egg and donor sperm different than a woman getting pregnant and choosing an adoption plan when she got pregnant by a guy she doesn't know (i.e. to the baby the father is anonymous?)
I think it's different, especially if the surrogate is being paid, for a couple of reasons. But what do you guys think the implication on the child is in this situation? What about if the adoptive family in this situation keeps in contact with the surrogate throughout the child's life? Does that make it different?
Advertisements
If someone uses a surrogacy with their own eggs and partners sperm because they have problems in carrying a child, I have no real problem with that. If they are using a surrogate because they want to keep their shape, that annoys me. So motivation is a key.
In regards to initial OP, I definitely agree that is wrong for the reasons that others have given.
Heterosexual couples are doing this, also, and it's been going on for years. One of the things that struck me about it was that the babies will be on a plane immediately after birth. That strikes me as nuts, AFA baby's development/ security, etc.
In reality, it's not much different than surrogates in the same country, which I still have a hard time wrapping my head around. One of my friends said she always thought everyone here should adopt from the USA, to help children here -- till she learned the realities of dealing with the foster care system. It's pretty easy to see why people would want to avoid that.