Surrogacy

[poliphilo]

A childless friend of mine is considering surrogacy. I know what I feel- which is "yeuch"; I'm less sure what I think.  To help me make up my mind my friend sent me this article from The New York Times.  The author has had two kids with two different surrogates, is awfully pleased with the supremely ethical choices she has made- and seems to believe- as rich people so often do- that the people she is paying are smiling at her because they love her. She also descends, towards the end, into nauseating babytalk. The article hasn't changed my feelings. If anything it has hardened them- but I don't like finding myself on the same side as the Pope.  Are my objections atavistic and patriarchal or am I right to trust my gut? 

Comments

[glitzfrau.livejournal.com]

I have the same gut reaction.

But I have had the same gut reaction about many things that seemed distasteful to me in the past, including abortion, gender corrective surgery, IVF, adoption and plastic surgery, and have changed my attitudes to all of them (well, only partially to the last one) when I experienced them close to hand. We don't make choices in a perfect world where ethics are simple and clear-cut; we make them in an unequal capitalist world where some people are infertile and desperate and others are poor and/or willing. I wouldn't want to act as a surrogate, but I have lots of more attractive choices to earn a few grand; for a woman in a less privileged position, it might well seem a much better option than struggling for years in unpleasant work to build up the same amount of money that you can gain in nine months as a surrogate.

And as a lesbian, I don't think I have the right to judge anyone else's unorthodox reproductive choices, because I sure as hell can't have a baby the 'natural' 'tasteful' way.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

I think my revulsion from surrogacy has a lot to do with its unfamiliarity. It's a relatively new idea. It hasn't been debated all that much. Society isn't comfortable with it. We haven't worked out the ethics.

The women who acted as surrogates for the author of the article were neither of them desperately needy- and seem to have chosen to do it- by her account anyway- because they enjoy being pregnant.

[arielstarshadow.livejournal.com]

The only issue I have with surrogacy is the number of orphaned children who need loving parents and a good home.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

I suspect a lot of the people who opt for surrogacy don't really want a child, they want a baby.

[athenais.livejournal.com]

Specifically, what they (and it's usually a couple) really want is a child with their genetic heritage if at all possible. This woman didn't have viable eggs and couldn't carry to term, so they used an egg donor and surrogates both. Adoption would be to give up entirely on having a child of your body and lots of people want to try anything they can first to have their own child.

Also, adoption isn't that easy a road to take. Laws have been tightened up (rightfully, in my opinion) and it's expensive and there's a reason why so many people turned to places like Romania and China rather than adopt at home.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

The desire to hand on one's DNA is very basic. All animals have it. I guess it's coded in some fairly primitive region of the brain.

I agree about adoption laws.

[steepholm.livejournal.com]

Could the same not equally be said of many people who create a child more conventional means?

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

It certainly could.

For myself I greatly prefer children to babies. Babies are really rather dull.

[steepholm.livejournal.com]

Why is this an issue with surrogacy rather than an issue with having children in general? I don't understand why adoption should be the responsibility of infertile couples more than of fertile ones.

[athenais.livejournal.com]

What are your objections, precisely? (I read the same article and was also put off by the woman's overwhelming sense of privilege.) I think surrogacy is as ethical as any artificial creation of babies. Do you feel icky about IVF, for instance?

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

That's it- I find it very hard to formulate a rational argument against it. If the surrogates actually enjoy the work- as the two in the article seem to have done- it's very hard to argue that they're being exploited.

My reaction is visceral- and maybe not to be trusted. I don't have problems with IVF- except for a wholly personal squeamishness about medical procedures.

[jnanacandra.livejournal.com]

Two people can find a thing unethical for wholly different (and even incompatible) sets of reasons.

Personally, I think surrogacy can be a fine and even beautiful thing. I know people for whom the act of surrogacy has been a sacred calling. But it is terribly vulnerable to exploitation in classist society. And as you allude to, the rich people paying for the service are often so blind to their privilege that they won't be able to see the inequity in the situation.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

My reaction puzzles me- and I can't entirely get my head round it. The woman's sense of entitlement annoys me, but that's not the reason for my qualms.

I'm open to the possibility that I'm wholly mistaken and in the wrong.

[airstrip.livejournal.com]

How would you feel if someone offered a slice of their liver, which can grow into a whole organ, for sale to people who needed one?

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

I think I would feel a similar queasiness. This is a gut reaction, not a reasoned one.

[airstrip.livejournal.com]

What if they donated the same?

[airstrip.livejournal.com]

Anyway, what I'm trying to do is get at what causes the "queasiness". Some people are bothered by it because they are bothered by all things bodily which come from others. Some people are queasy because of the pecuniary dimension.

Some people have a real problem with surrogacy in itself without any ties to payments or any queasiness about any other kind of "organ sharing".

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

A woman carries a child for 9 months and then hands it over to someone else. This strikes at everything we believe about motherhood. I think the initial reaction has to be "whoops".

[heleninwales.livejournal.com]

I couldn't hand over a child that was mine, that is was conceived from one of my fertilised eggs and contained my DNA and I can't understand (at a visceral level) how any woman could do that. However, though I personally didn't enjoy being pregnant, I know some women do and they do genuinely glow and look beautiful in that condition, so I don't have any problem with them offering to grow a baby (created by IVF) for someone else.

Motherhood isn't just about incubating a foetus; it's about passing on a genetic inheritance and nurturing a baby to adulthood. Or in other words, providing both the nature and the nurture.

All purely my own opinion, of course.

[airstrip.livejournal.com]

Ah. So it's the surrogate and their ability to surrender the child which makes you squeamish?

I don't think that's necessarily misplaced. Someone who's able to do that might lack a solid emotional foundation.

[baritonejeff.livejournal.com]

The comments thus far are intelligent and reasoned, and I learned something in the reading.

How I feel about it? Like anything of this nature, the potential for abuse is high and the affluent have by far the most options.

This is an intensely personal thing. I have no problem with it personally *if* all parties concerned have thoroughly thought it through, and are themselves comfortable.

If so, it's none of my business.

I know that the baser side of human nature will mandate that this frequently is not so.

Very sad.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

I want to be able to support my friend if she decides to go down this route, but I have to deal with my prejudices first.

[baritonejeff.livejournal.com]

At least you are making a strong attempt to do so. Most people wouldn't, I think.

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

I believe that one is almost NEVER right to trust one's gut on moral issues. One's gut is often a good way to START thinking about things, but it's a terrible place to FINISH thinking about it.

"yeuch" isn't a moral judgement. You're squicked by it. That's fine; you can be squcked by things. And being squicked by something is a perfectly good reason to not do it yourself.

But the fact that something squicks you has absolutely nothing to do with whether it is an ethical action or not.

Are there ethical issues surrounding surrogacy? Absolutely. For instance, if the surrogate, after giving birth, decides that she wants to keep the child, does she have an ethical claim to it?

That's certainly a significant ethical issue to consider -- but it doesn't reflect on the question of whether surrogacy itself is ethical and/or moral.

If something is unethical, you should be able to find a specific ethical principle that it violates. If something is immoral, you should be able to find at least a general moral principle that it violates.

If you can do neither, then you're just being squicked by the concept and you should get over it.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

I agree.

The ethical consideration has to do with the use of human beings and their bodies as mere commodities. The author of the article- to do her justice- has negotiated all that with considerable sensitivity. If everyone is a free agent and no-one is being exploited the ethical objections largely disappear.

[silveredmane.livejournal.com]

Here's a surrogacy situation from a different perspective.

The (23 year old) daughter of a friend of mine very recently loaned her womb, so to speak, and bore a child that will be raised by two gay men. They're a stable couple, reasonably affluent, well-educated people and loving parents. Because they are a same-sex couple, they are simply not eligible to adopt a child in the US - so surrogacy was their only way of being able to have and raise a child of their own. They subsidized the mother while she was pregnant, but it wasn't primarily a financial arrangement. They are her friends, and she did it out of love.

Is that easier to countenance?

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

That seems to me to be a best case scenario. No-one is being exploited.