The fact that the mother of the baby is called the “surrogate” tells you all you need to know. Another medical industry based on lies, like the trans phenomenon. It is the purchasers who are surrogates.
The mother is the woman in whose body the baby spends its first nine months. She is the baby’s entire world. Then the baby is born and with surrogacy the baby is removed to a completely different place, with different sounds, smells, touches, energies. In earlier times we knew that motherless babies did not thrive. Now we are deliberately engineering the birth of motherless babies so that selfish rich people can have “their own” children without the inconvenience of having the dangerous activities of pregnancy and childbirth - the things that create an irreplaceable relationship between mother and child.
The purchasers are the surrogates and can never replace a child’s real mother. This practice is a human rights abuse against women and children.
It's not just that. Any objections to this form of exploitation are regularly being branded as anti-gay.
I'm certainly not a fan of Italy's neofascist government, but their surrogacy ban was sensible. Liberals and leftwingers all over Europe protested this ban as being "against LGBT people" and some such nonsense, and boy, was this a wave of protest.
One of worrying things is that even countries that have banned surrogacy usually have no laws in place that ban people from buying babies abroad. Austria, my home country, is such a case.
Of course it's great that at least here women can not be exploited in this horrendous way. But with places like the Ukraine close by, the ban is almost moot. Dozens, perhaps hundreds, of Austrian buy babies there every year, and they have to fear no prosecution, nor do they have any problems having these babies recognized as their own here - babies that they are technically not allowed to have.
very interesting read. im curious about this topic but extremely uninformed. as of right now i didn’t really think there was much wrong with surrogacy, after all it’s an option couples who struggle with having children have, but now i’m realizing how normalized and how huge this *industry* is. i don’t think it should be that way at all.
A few thougths. In my mind it all started with patriarchy and the claim to women, mothers and children...and the family courts. All of this is happening because family courts worldwide favour fathers rights to the child with the same kind of twisted wording/euphemisms we find in all of these issues (fathers rights movement, trans ideology, hague convention, surrogacy, sexual exploitation/pornography/protstitution/abuse). mysteriously the rulings in family courts around the world are sychronized and all sound the same/have the same dynamics, players (experts) and wordings. of course they are also all held in secret... in germany i know of cases of sperm donors suing for custody and getting it... so the "fathers" are the real rulers still....fyi there is not much hope, in case anyone is still under the illusion, that there is actual justice happening in family courts. they are notoriously corrupt and only cater to the powerful. this includes the entire so called "child protection" industry acting around the courts: child protection services, legal guardians, therapists, family therapists, family helpers, psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers etc...
also a very disturbing and confusing trend: victims of abuse are buying babies. Paris Hilton and Amber Heard are both victims of horrible abuse, activists against coercive control and domestic violence and at the same time buying babies. The members of those activists groups are ignoring the fact to keep the outreach of their celebrities going... Nobody wants to analyse this....
I was disappointed to read Riley keough has a surrogate due to her auto immune condition however she made a film while the surrogate grew her baby . Completely screwy
Ethically the only way I feel accepting of it is when a sister or mother carries a child for their family member who cannot. Outside of that, it’s akin to buying a pedigree cat or dog from a breeder or a prize young ram or stallion to add to the farm’s genetic pool: women as livestock.
The fact that the mother of the baby is called the “surrogate” tells you all you need to know. Another medical industry based on lies, like the trans phenomenon. It is the purchasers who are surrogates.
The mother is the woman in whose body the baby spends its first nine months. She is the baby’s entire world. Then the baby is born and with surrogacy the baby is removed to a completely different place, with different sounds, smells, touches, energies. In earlier times we knew that motherless babies did not thrive. Now we are deliberately engineering the birth of motherless babies so that selfish rich people can have “their own” children without the inconvenience of having the dangerous activities of pregnancy and childbirth - the things that create an irreplaceable relationship between mother and child.
The purchasers are the surrogates and can never replace a child’s real mother. This practice is a human rights abuse against women and children.
How depressing to see this become normalized.
It's not just that. Any objections to this form of exploitation are regularly being branded as anti-gay.
I'm certainly not a fan of Italy's neofascist government, but their surrogacy ban was sensible. Liberals and leftwingers all over Europe protested this ban as being "against LGBT people" and some such nonsense, and boy, was this a wave of protest.
One of worrying things is that even countries that have banned surrogacy usually have no laws in place that ban people from buying babies abroad. Austria, my home country, is such a case.
Of course it's great that at least here women can not be exploited in this horrendous way. But with places like the Ukraine close by, the ban is almost moot. Dozens, perhaps hundreds, of Austrian buy babies there every year, and they have to fear no prosecution, nor do they have any problems having these babies recognized as their own here - babies that they are technically not allowed to have.
very interesting read. im curious about this topic but extremely uninformed. as of right now i didn’t really think there was much wrong with surrogacy, after all it’s an option couples who struggle with having children have, but now i’m realizing how normalized and how huge this *industry* is. i don’t think it should be that way at all.
Thank you for this great article!
A few thougths. In my mind it all started with patriarchy and the claim to women, mothers and children...and the family courts. All of this is happening because family courts worldwide favour fathers rights to the child with the same kind of twisted wording/euphemisms we find in all of these issues (fathers rights movement, trans ideology, hague convention, surrogacy, sexual exploitation/pornography/protstitution/abuse). mysteriously the rulings in family courts around the world are sychronized and all sound the same/have the same dynamics, players (experts) and wordings. of course they are also all held in secret... in germany i know of cases of sperm donors suing for custody and getting it... so the "fathers" are the real rulers still....fyi there is not much hope, in case anyone is still under the illusion, that there is actual justice happening in family courts. they are notoriously corrupt and only cater to the powerful. this includes the entire so called "child protection" industry acting around the courts: child protection services, legal guardians, therapists, family therapists, family helpers, psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers etc...
also a very disturbing and confusing trend: victims of abuse are buying babies. Paris Hilton and Amber Heard are both victims of horrible abuse, activists against coercive control and domestic violence and at the same time buying babies. The members of those activists groups are ignoring the fact to keep the outreach of their celebrities going... Nobody wants to analyse this....
I was disappointed to read Riley keough has a surrogate due to her auto immune condition however she made a film while the surrogate grew her baby . Completely screwy
Ethically the only way I feel accepting of it is when a sister or mother carries a child for their family member who cannot. Outside of that, it’s akin to buying a pedigree cat or dog from a breeder or a prize young ram or stallion to add to the farm’s genetic pool: women as livestock.