A surrogate is a woman who gestates a fetus for others, often times it is for another couple or a mother. She carries the pregnancy and let them adopt the baby legally after it is born. Surrogate arrangements are generally complex: it takes different arrangements and contacts in order to start the surrogacy. Some women are getting paid to fulfill the job of being a surrogate mother, ranging from $10,000 to $30,000 (p. 398), while others do not expect any kind of payment. Some states had outlawed surrogacy, for they believe that it is illegal to involve the buying and selling of children (baby-selling) for it is a “blatant affront to human dignity” (p. 400). Defenders of surrogacy deny this term and claims that surrogate are relinquishing her right as a parent to have a relationship with the child. They often compare this action similar to adoption, in which biological parents give away their children.
Taking a consequentialist approach, Laura Purdy affirms that in most cases, the benefits of surrogate mothering may outweigh its costs, and thus, will be morally permissible. Some feminist argue that the practice is necessarily wrong because it “separates sex from reproduction, transfers the burden to another woman, and separates child reproduction from child rearing” (p.454-456). However, Purdy finds the arguments very unconvincing. There is no evidence to suggest that surrogacy is harmful to children, and she agrees that it is more likely that banning or criminalizing surrogacy would result in substantial harm to children. She argues that surrogacy does not necessarily constitute the commodification or degradation of children. Purdy examines that surrogacy is not just baby selling, but a better characterization of the birth mother...
... middle of paper ...
...ther is now responsible to the baby inside her, and thus, it will coerce women to go through pregnancy and the possibility of raising the child alone. Also, surrogacy mothering can be rendered immoral by the unjust surrogacy contracts. It is the clause that if something were to happen to the baby, or the baby tends to be handicapped, the surrogate mother will get penalized. In order to regulate such contracts, Purdy’s solution is to form a law forbidding all surrogacy agreements (p.460).
Overall, I agree with Purdy’s stance on this issue. Surrogacy is not immoral is it benefits the surrogate mother and the family involve throughout the surrogacy process. Surrogacy does not harm the children, and the burden and risks are taken into consideration all throughout the process. Surrogacy may appear risky, it is still desirable to others who cannot afford to have a child.
Surrogate pregnancy was talked about and questioned in the early 1970’s but was not put into practice until 1976. The first case documented actually comes from the bible. It was the story of Abraham and Sarah. Sarah talks about her experience with infertility. She then turns to Hagar, her handmaiden, and asks her if she would carry their child for them since she was unable to. Hagar was their maid so in a way it was a command, not exactly a favor or question.
Susan M (2007) Surrogate Motherhood and The Politics of Reproduction, University of California Press Ltd, pp.4
A surrogacy is the carrying of a pregnancy for intended parents. There are two kinds of surrogacy: “Gestational”, in which the egg and sperm belong to the intended parents and is carried by the surrogate, and “traditional”, where the surrogate is inseminated with the intended father’s sperm. Regardless of the method, I believe that surrogacy cannot be morally justified. Surrogacy literally means “substitute”, or “replacement”. A surrogate is a replacement for a mother for that 9-month period of pregnancy, and therefore is reducing the role of the surrogate mother to an oversimplified and dehumanizing labor. The pregnancy process for the gestational mother can be very physically and mentally demanding, and is unique because after birthing the
I would have said that it was a generous and thoughtful act of kindness for a surrogate to be willing to help a couple bring a child into this world. I would have never thought deeply about some of the moral and ethical aspects of surrogacy, until now. I have been married for almost four years, and I believe in the unity of marriage and the idea of becoming one. After reading Cahill’s argument on surrogacy, and reflected on my own moral values, I immediately took a stance to agree with her. I believe that when it comes to a child, the best interest of the child should be a top priority. I am not a mother, but I am very passionate about children, and find their lives to be so precious. Parents should always have the child’s best interest in mind when making choices regarding their child’s life. A surrogate may be doing it as an act of kindness, and that may be her intention. However, I agree that surrogacy brings a dualistic element to the relationship. I know that as a married woman I would never hire a surrogate to bear my child, nor be a surrogate to carry someone else’s child. I want children, but I would never want to be treated as the means to an end, and I would not want my child to be considered a commodity. I strongly agree with Cahill in that a binding moral obligation does come with certain choices, even if we did not choose them in the first
The advancement and continued developments of third-party assisted reproductive medical practices has allowed many prospective parents, regardless of their marital status, age, or sexual orientation, to have a new opportunity for genetically or biologically connected children. With these developments come a number of rather complex ethical issues and ongoing discussions regarding assisted reproduction within our society today. These issues include the use of reproductive drugs, gestational services such as surrogacy as well as the rights of those seeking these drugs and services and the responsibilities of the professionals who offer and practice these services.
“Sometimes when making something so precious, beautiful and unique, it takes an extra helping heart” (Author Unknown). To me, surrogate motherhood is giving the gift of a child to an individual who cannot carry a child themselves. I chose this topic because it interests me to see what kind of problems are linked with the journey of surrogacy. I have seen plenty of fictional movies about surrogate mothers, and I wanted to learn if any of these issues happened in real life situations. Before I began my research I thought about the ethical, legal, and social problems that could arise during the process of surrogacy. Legally, I thought you could be a surrogate
The addition of a child into a family’s home is a happy occasion. Unfortunately, some families are unable to have a child due to unforeseen problems, and they must pursue other means than natural pregnancy. Some couples adopt and other couples follow a different path; they utilize in vitro fertilization or surrogate motherhood. The process is complicated, unreliable, but ultimately can give the parents the gift of a child they otherwise could not have had. At the same time, as the process becomes more and more advanced and scientists are able to predict the outcome of the technique, the choice of what child is born is placed in the hands of the parents. Instead of waiting to see if the child had the mother’s eyes, the father’s hair or Grandma’s heart problem, the parents and doctors can select the best eggs and the best sperm to create the perfect child. Many see the rise of in vitro fertilization as the second coming of the Eugenics movement of the 19th and early 20th century. A process that is able to bring joy to so many parents is also seen as deciding who is able to reproduce and what child is worthy of birthing.
Surrogacy is becoming extremely popular as a way for people to build their families and women to have a source of income. Many people have various reasons for their opposition to it whether it be by comparing it to prostitution or disagreeing with how military wives take advantage of the Tricare insurance. Lorraine Ali states in her article “The Curious Lives of Surrogates” that one of the more popular reasons to oppose surrogacy is that it contradicts, “what we’ve always thought of as an unbreakable bond between mother and child.” However, a woman’s inability to conceive her own children does not determine the absence of a mother to child bond.
Gestational surrogacy, especially when it involves commercial surrogates, challenges the status quo in the ethical theory of reproduction, because with this technology the process of producing a child can no longer remain a private matter. Now a public contract exists between two parties, the couple and the surrogate ...
Arguments against commercial surrogacy typically revolve around the idea that surrogacy is a form of child-selling. Critics believe that commercial surrogacy violates both women’s and children’s rights. In addition, by making surrogacy contracts legally enforceable, courts will follow the contract rather than choose what is best for the child. However, in her article “Surrogate Mothering: Exploring Empowerment” Laura Pudry is not convinced by these arguments.
Commercial surrogacy commodifies children because by paying the surrogate mother to give up her child, they treat the child as an object of exchange or commodity that can be bought and sold. As any business transaction, the parents give money for the exchange of an object, the child. The parents get their desired child and the mother gets the money, but what about what thee child think about this event? The parents and surrogate mother’s action were done with self-interest. It could be argued that they wanted the best for the child. However, the first priority in the intentional procreation of the child was not the welfare of the child but rather to give it up to the parents in exchange of money. Additionally, women’s labor is commodified because the surrogate mother treats her parental rights as it was a property right not as a trust. In other words, the decisions taken concerning the child are not done primarily for the benefit of the child. The act of the mother relenting her parental rights is done for a monetary price. She disposes of her parental rights, which are to be managed for the welfare of the owner, as if they were property right, which are to be handled for personal
Frame, T. R. "Reproductive Rights." Children on Demand: The Ethics of Defying Nature. Coogee, N.S.W.: UNSW, 2008. N. pag. Print.
Most young people envision their future in the realm of getting married and creating a family. One of the most devastating things that can happen to a young couple is to be told they cannot have children. There are several options the couple can pursue, and one of those options available is surrogacy. Society today is torn on whether or not surrogacy should be legal in today’s world. Surrogacy is very controversial for many people around the world, and opinions are strong on the subject. Surrogacy is defined as the utilization of a third party female in order for a infertile family to create a biological child for their family. Legalized surrogacy is important to many couples as an option of creating the family they have always dreamed
Surrogacy is when a woman offers to carry a baby on behalf of someone else. Once the baby is born, the surrogate mother returns the baby to its intended parents (IVF Australia, 2017). The embryo can be from the intended parents or donors, however the Australian Surrogacy Act of 2010 states that “the surrogate has no genetic link to the child and her eggs cannot be used to conceive the child.” (Queensland Government, 2017). In various Christian and Jewish denominations, such as Catholicism and Orthodox Judaism, the use of surrogacy to have a child is highly condemned (Surrogate Mothers Inc. 2016).
This is unlike the case for the rich, who can travel to other places where they can procure safe abortions. In addition, the prohibition of abortion often defeats the purpose of bringing up a child. A child is often considered a fruit of love and passion among two consenting adults. However, in cases where a woman feels that she does not want or does not have the capacity to bring up a child, it goes without saying more children would be brought up in situations and homes that are less than loving. Indeed, the prohibition would result in unwanted children, which are often the most tragic cases in the society (Norgren et al, 2001).