Surrogacy, Anyone?
People do the strangest things - don't we? Succumbing to desires and whims, we are prepared to take on the oddest things for ourselves. Sometimes with the conviction that in doing these things we are being socially useful, or helpful in some way to others who wish to have something that we already have. If there's really nothing in it for us in the way of material gain, and we're reasonably discreet about it, we're being rather altruistic.
In making some kind of personal sacrifice to assist others.
It's that way with someone who is willing to carry a foetus for someone else. To, at the end of a long period of gestation which certainly causes discomfort and misery to a lot of people, produce a living, breathing child to be raised by someone other than the birth mother. That's the ultimate gift. It's hard to even imagine a woman being willing to undergo a pregnancy not her own, to carry a child to birth that she will not follow as that child grows.
Perhaps there's a deep satisfaction for some women in doing such a thing, but to most women it would represent the most difficult, perplexing, unrealistic situation they might imagine themselves to be involved with. In Canada it is illegal for a surrogate mother carrying someone else's child - even if the egg is hers and the sperm is that of the male of the intended parents, to be paid for the effort. There cannot be material gain.
Expenses incurred relating to the pregnancy may be collected from the prospective parents, but that's about it, although there is a fuzzy grey area about what constitutes expenses and how much in the way of expenses could be recognized in terms of material value or dollar amounts. Imagine, a young woman who already has two natural-birthed children of her own yet in their infancy, agreeing to carry twins for another couple unable to conceive on their own.
She is Canadian, a surrogate living in Bathurst, New Brunswick, and the intended parents live in Hertfordshire, England. The couple from England visited the New Brunswick woman. The woman of the pair was diagnosed with polycystic ovarian syndrome, a genetic disease that affects childbearing-aged women, resulting in infertility. They signed a contract of intent, and agreed to pay the surrogate $200 monthly to cover expenses.
They kept in constant communication on a daily basis to update themselves on the proceedings. And then, when the surrogate mother was being monitored overnight in hospital after an ultrasound revealed she was at risk of going into early labour at 27 weeks' gestation, as she was text-messaging her condition for the British couple, they cancelled the agreement.
The woman advised the advocate to "break it all off ... I'm not physically or mentally able to take care of another person right now." The couple had separated.
And surrogate Cathleen Hachey was left holding, in effect, two babies. The contracting couple changed their telephone numbers, deleted the surrogate from their social media contacts, and they were never heard from again. The resulting girl and boy babies eventually did end up in the hands of another couple anxious to adopt children for themselves.
And Cathleen Hachey had no assistance in finding them; she was on her own. Lawyers and surrogacy agencies informed her: "They are your biological children so they are your biological problem. Admittedly, this was a highly unusual situation.
But it does illustrate the polarities of peoples' aspirations and the perceived and actual level of their ethical commitments.
In making some kind of personal sacrifice to assist others.
It's that way with someone who is willing to carry a foetus for someone else. To, at the end of a long period of gestation which certainly causes discomfort and misery to a lot of people, produce a living, breathing child to be raised by someone other than the birth mother. That's the ultimate gift. It's hard to even imagine a woman being willing to undergo a pregnancy not her own, to carry a child to birth that she will not follow as that child grows.
Perhaps there's a deep satisfaction for some women in doing such a thing, but to most women it would represent the most difficult, perplexing, unrealistic situation they might imagine themselves to be involved with. In Canada it is illegal for a surrogate mother carrying someone else's child - even if the egg is hers and the sperm is that of the male of the intended parents, to be paid for the effort. There cannot be material gain.
Expenses incurred relating to the pregnancy may be collected from the prospective parents, but that's about it, although there is a fuzzy grey area about what constitutes expenses and how much in the way of expenses could be recognized in terms of material value or dollar amounts. Imagine, a young woman who already has two natural-birthed children of her own yet in their infancy, agreeing to carry twins for another couple unable to conceive on their own.
She is Canadian, a surrogate living in Bathurst, New Brunswick, and the intended parents live in Hertfordshire, England. The couple from England visited the New Brunswick woman. The woman of the pair was diagnosed with polycystic ovarian syndrome, a genetic disease that affects childbearing-aged women, resulting in infertility. They signed a contract of intent, and agreed to pay the surrogate $200 monthly to cover expenses.
They kept in constant communication on a daily basis to update themselves on the proceedings. And then, when the surrogate mother was being monitored overnight in hospital after an ultrasound revealed she was at risk of going into early labour at 27 weeks' gestation, as she was text-messaging her condition for the British couple, they cancelled the agreement.
The woman advised the advocate to "break it all off ... I'm not physically or mentally able to take care of another person right now." The couple had separated.
And surrogate Cathleen Hachey was left holding, in effect, two babies. The contracting couple changed their telephone numbers, deleted the surrogate from their social media contacts, and they were never heard from again. The resulting girl and boy babies eventually did end up in the hands of another couple anxious to adopt children for themselves.
And Cathleen Hachey had no assistance in finding them; she was on her own. Lawyers and surrogacy agencies informed her: "They are your biological children so they are your biological problem. Admittedly, this was a highly unusual situation.
But it does illustrate the polarities of peoples' aspirations and the perceived and actual level of their ethical commitments.
Labels: Family, Human Relations, Social-Cultural Deviations
posted by Pieface @ 6:32 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home