Mitt Romney's Son Signed 'Abortion' Clause In Surrogate Birth Contract

[WillParkinson]

Mitt Romney's Son Signed 'Abortion' Clause In Surrogate Birth Contract

TMZ has learned Mitt Romney's son Tagg -- who had twins this year through a surrogate -- signed an agreement that gave the surrogate, as well as Tagg and his wife, the right to abort the fetuses in non-life threatening situations ... and Mitt Romney covered some of the expenses connected with the arrangement ... and it may boil down to an incredibly stupid mistake.

The twin boys -- David Mitt and William Ryder -- were born on May 4, 2012. We've learned Tagg and his wife Jen, along with the surrogate and her husband, signed a Gestational Carrier Agreement dated July 28, 2011. Paragraph 13 of the agreement reads as follows:

"If in the opinion of the treating physician or her independent obstetrician there is potential physical harm to the surrogate, the decision to abort or not abort is to be made by the surrogate."

Translation: Tagg and Jen gave the surrogate the right to abort the fetuses even if her life wasn't in danger. All the surrogate has to show is "potential physical harm," which could be something like preeclampsia -- a type of high blood pressure that could damage the mother's liver, kidney or brain, but is not necessarily life-threatening.

http://www.tmz.com/2012/09/20/mitt-romney-son-tagg-abortion-clause-surrogate-birth-agreement-contract-bill-handel/

[Angry Dragon]

1. I guess abortion is okay if you are rich or a Mormon

[Ikonoklast]

5. The wealthy don't care if abortion is made illegal because they will still have access

to a safe abortion on demand, no matter what the law says.

Laws of this nation never once stopped them from getting what they wanted before.

[mopinko]

10. ding ding ding

that's what i always say, too.

[orwell]

2. Tagg, you're it! n/t

[cynatnite]

4. Hypocritical yes, but that was between them. Not anyone's business. n/t

[WillParkinson]

11. Like a woman and her doctor?

The kind that Mr. Romney seems to want to interject himself into all the time?

[cynatnite]

14. Exactly. I don't view this as anyone's business no matter their own anti-choice views....

I would be hypocritical otherwise.

[gopiscrap]

15. I say bullshit

these fucking repukes want to enter your body and make it illegal for you to do certain things...then that opens them to be public vessels..as far as I am concerned all adult relatives of a candidate are open season!

[cynatnite]

16. This is Romney's kid. It's their fucking business. Not yours and not mine.

They had a contract with the surrogate. Their business.

If it was someone who had a say in policy...then you'd have a point and I wouldn't say a word. This is private business and all the self-righeousness in the world doesn't change that.

[gopiscrap]

17. I disagree, the repukes

go after everybody..specially this situation if we can make a few points then go for it..they're adults...I agree leave kids alone, once you're an adult tough shit...I've run for US Congress and almost made it, I know how tough it is...if you don't want your family in the headlines-don't run, simple as that. One of the reasons the Democrats don't do as well as they should is because they don't get in the gutter with the repukes.

[cynatnite]

18. All the justification in the world still won't make it right no matter who does it...

This is private business and not for public consumption. It was a contract between a surrogate and a husband and wife who wanted a baby.

It's a sad fact that at times some people can't help but see everything through a political lens. Some people think they have a moral right to go after someone who just so happened to be standing within arms length of a politician, relative or not. The repukes have done it more than once and they're no more right to do it than you are.

Sorry, no justification. Period.

Edited to add: There is another reason I refuse to do this. I'm better than them.

[gopiscrap]

19. I didn't say it was right

I don't care how the Democrats win just so as long as they do it legally..I'd rather have the Democrats win in the gutter than lose on the high plains of moralism...you can't effect policy or work for the common good not winning!

[cynatnite]

20. Plenty of Dems have won without having to get in the gutter with the repukes...

We've got a guy in the WH who did just that.

[Javaman]

23. And plenty have lost by not getting in the gutter. nt

[cynatnite]

26. I suppose it depends if you can look at yourself in the mirror after all is said and done. n/t

[gopiscrap]

28. I'd rather do everything I could legally

and stay on some artificial moral high ground than lose..liberals are of no use if they don't elected....

[Javaman]

31. enjoy looking at yourself in the mirror all you want while your rights are taken away

because you felt you couldn't morally bring yourself to use their own tactics against them.

[gopiscrap]

27. Thank you!!!

[gopiscrap]

33. I don't care it it's right as long as it is legal

Dems need to wallow more in the gutter, if you watched the 2010 elections that's one of the reason all these Dems lost...as far as I am concerned if you're an adult relative of a politician, tough shit!!!

[gopiscrap]

34. And yes everything is through a poolitical lens

if you let up for one second you could lose ground..I would rather totally tear apart a conservative life than let them gain one poilitically...that's partly how you win..like I said, you can't vote on legislation if you lose.

[MariaM83]

6. this is personal info that should be 100% off limits (unless Tagg or wife is running for office) nt

[WillParkinson]

12. Well....

"and Mitt Romney covered some of the expenses connected with the arrangement" does kind of bring him into it, accidental or misunderstanding aside.

[MadrasT]

29. +1

[Booster]

7. But, but, but this was MY family not some low-life moocher.

[polichick]

8. That's exactly the mindset.

[cbdo2007]

9. Of course....Mitt Romney has a history of being pro-choice. He is only pro-life when RUNNING

for president but as actual President he will become pro-choice again because that's how he lives his life.

[MariaM83]

13. how he lives his life and how he wants other people's lives to be lived aren't necessarily

the same thing.

Besides, assuming he is elected, he will want a second term, which will mean he will continue to worship at the altar of the far right.

[leftynyc]

21. Romney's son is not running

This is between him and his wife and their doctor.

[MariaM83]

25. agree 100% nt

[gkhouston]

22. The clause is probably standard for such contracts. This is a non-story to me. n/t

[spanone]

24. this was life pre-roe v wade...the rich got their abortions while the poor died in alley ways.

[tufnel]

30. Sorry but...

I don't think candidate's children should be involved like this, and especially their decisions in private life.

Romney is applying for the job as President - Tagg isn't.

[gopiscrap]

35. If the child is an adult, tough shit

specially when there's a posinbility of scoring some political points

[nanabugg]

32. It sure is their business. And the decision to have an abortion or not is

any other woman's decision along with her husband and doctor if necessary. Tagg is not running for office but Mitt is and he carries the baggage of the teaparty and right-to-lifers.