The first step towards an international instrument to abolish surrogacy.

[TheywontletmehavethenameIwant]

"A group of states at the United Nations has launched a political declaration calling for an international moratorium on surrogacy, marking a significant first step in what its supporters hope will become a global abolitionist framework."

UN States Launch Political Declaration for Global Surrogacy Moratorium ━ The European Conservative

"That is a long road. But for those who oppose the buying and selling of babies and the exploitation of women, the fact that states have now placed the issue formally on the UN track is already the point: the market is global, and the response is beginning to become global, too."

I not sure I have any faith in the UN anymore, but hopefully this will gain some traction, I can see it clashing with the Global Left's Utopian ideals though.

In general I don't think that all opinions need to be shared all of the time. That said I don't think that the separation of mums and newborns is something that we should celebrate or normalise.

I think what we should normalise is women having choice over their fertility and future. Adoption is part of that. As is abortion and even surrogacy.

See I think that babies are mostly best off with their mums and we should be reducing the need for separations by supporting women to keep babies or have access to abortion and contraception when that's not possible. It's always a loss for the baby to lose their mother even if they are lucky enough to go to a good home.

We can certainly reduce the number of women who feel unable to care for their children with a more equal society. That would be the way to minimise the number of children relinquished to adoption due to a lack of resources.

What does the research say about the children born through surrogacy? Have you looked into their outcomes at all?

@WhatNoRaisinsyou are spot on. The threshold for removing a new born baby upon discharge is rightly extremely high. Even in the last few years this has got much higher and mother and baby residential placements must be tried first even if the stakes are very high. There is case law Re BS when only adoption will do - eh we n every last resort have been ruled out for the baby.

@TheBlueKoalalots of prospective parents won’t pass an adoption assessment. In my opinion some people can’t be parents needs to be normalised. I think it will be eventually.

I think donor and surrogacy children will be speaking out in greater numbers. I've read a lot from donor conceived children who have struggled with their parents decision and how things were handled.

The other thing that really stands out to me is how at least in the UK (can't comment on other cultures) many adoptive parents seem very informed and educated on the reality of what their children have gone through and demonstrate a level of understanding and compassion that you don't see in parents that have used surrogates. I don't get how we can be so different about these two things that are the same thing for the baby.

Landmark study finds no difference in psychological wellbeing or quality of family relationships between children born by assisted reproduction (egg or sperm donation or surrogacy) and those born naturally at age 20. However, findings suggest that telling children about their biological origins early – before they start school – can be advantageous for family relationships and healthy adjustment.

https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/assisted-reproduction-kids-grow-up-just-fine-but-it-may-be-better-to-tell-them-early-about

Can you link to these reports by donor conceived children?

I haven't read reports but I have gone down the rabbit hole reading some stories. I don't claim to be a researcher.

In the UK, a common issue with adoptions that leads to breakdowns of the adoption is that parents are ill informed and ill supported about the extent of the adopted child's issues.

Where are you getting this information from? Can you link your sources please?

Ok find them and link them here, please.

I don't owe you sources. I'm just a layperson on a forum.

Yes. But I am wondering whether your contributions should at all inform my conclusions. If they came from reputable sources, they would. But it seems more like it's just about your feelings on the matter.

I think your comments here, and feelings, are telling as to why I believe no surrogacy, even between loving family members, can be truly altruistic or free from exploitation.

This pp felt a lot of guilt because conception wasn’t happening for her sister, and it sounds like thoughts of ‘because I have the means, maybe I should’. These are typical of female socialisation and how much we are raised to try to alleviate other’s suffering and take responsibility for others feelings. In many ways a wonderful thing about women of course, and not the case for every woman, but broadly, women are very vulnerable to exploitation in this respect. It’s not infantilising to say that; just the reality of our history, culture, even our biology.

Well yes I'm not responsible for government policy. I'm just using a discussion forum and attempting to have a dialogue and maybe learn something. I've seen that Sea Lion cartoon and know that I can't win that scenario.

I think it is important that women are given the freedom to make autonomous decisions, even if they are influenced by the desire to be kind or giving. I wouldn't stop a man donating his kidney because he felt it was the manly, protective thing to do.

Of course it isn’t!!!

I wonder if sperm donation is seen differently because there have always been women left holding babies after very brief encounters without the need for fertility treatment. I think the different types of donor conceived or surrogacy gestated children can be quite distinct from each other actually.

Thank you for providing some actual facts on this🙂

I agree with you broadly but because imo this is not the best thing for babies (be created to be sold to a new parent), this is not a decision anyone should be allowed to make. On a quick scan of the study posted upthread, at least two of the researchers are proponents of surrogacy and the like. In contested issues like this, it’s very easy for research to be biased. There are so many examples worldwide of the ethical dubiety of surrogacy that I don’t believe women should be allowed to make the decision to do it.

Everybody is going to have an opinion on surrogacy. People also tend to do research in the fields they are professionally associsted with. If people who are pro-surrogacy are too biased to complete robust research on the topic, then surely so are people who are anti-surrogacy.

You cannot remove all bias from research. You can seek to minimise its influence on the final results through your methodology.

We always need to be mindful, though, that the call for autonomy can be used to mask exploitation of women where there are power imbalances.

Sure. That's the case for lots of things, though.

Which reinforces my point, I think.