Couple urges surrogate to abort Down syndrome baby

[n2doc]

When a Canadian couple learned their surrogate mother was carrying a fetus that was likely to be born with Down syndrome, they demanded an abortion.

The surrogate didn't want to abort the child, according to the National Post, and so the child's fate became about the surrogacy contract.

As more people turn to a third party to carry their babies, sticky situations like this are challenging the ethics of surrogacy. When all three people involved in a surrogacy aren't on the same page, what should happen?

According to the couple's agreement with the surrogate, if the surrogate birthed the child, the biological parents wouldn't have any legal responsibility for the child.

But many legal experts are saying that if this situation had been brought to court the surrogacy contract would have been disregarded. Instead the court would draw from family law requiring the biological parents to support the child.



Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfmoms/detail?entry_id=74005&tsp=1

Can you imagine the 3 ring circus over this had it taken place in the USA?

[elocs]

1. My guess is that "3 ring circus" would not even begin to describe the situation. n/t

[RobinA]

68. I Was Thinking

"sticky wicket." The whole surrogacy thing has always struck me has ticket to the Supreme Court with some poor kid's life in tatters no matter how the thing works out.

[Javaman]

2. Here comes the next "major news" item for faux news to spew out to their

rabid base of idiots!

I'm thinking a terry schiavo type response in in the making.

[BlueIris]

3. Everything about this situation makes me ill. nt

[smokey nj]

4. Me too.

:(

[RainDog]

6. me three

people who are so egotistical that they only want a child via a surrogate carrying their genes are disgusting to me. there are so many children who need adoptive parents - children are not accoutrements. when you become a parent, there is no guarantee of a healthy child, no guarantee of anything.

the surrogates in this instance make me want to vomit, especially.

[cbdo2007]

10. I'm glad you were blessed to not have any problems with infertility...

but apparently you were created as overly judgemental as a trade off.

Who cares what people do on their own time with their own bodies and money. You worry about you and let them worry about them. When you need to go through horrible stuff in your life, hopefully there won't be people there on the sidelines telling you what you should or shouldn't be doing.

[shireen]

12. +1

[RainDog]

18. No. I think the rich should not exploit women by renting their wombs

It is such a repulsive, egotistical, entitled bit of tripe for people who cannot have children to rent a womb rather than adopt.

that's my opinion. I don't care if you like it or not.

I think the money wasted on fertility treatments could be used to take care of children who are already born.

Again, I think it's the HEIGHT of egotism to INSIST that your dna must be in a child you love (or not, in the case of this child... see how disgusting this entire practice really is... a baby as a commodity??) and I really do not care if you agree or not.

In such cases, those who contract for a child should not be able to tell the surrogate to abort b/c the baby isn't "perfect." That's repulsive - that is exactly why this situation is so repulsive - someone with that attitude should never have children, imo, b/c they have no idea how to be a parent.

They want an accessory.

[Warren DeMontague]

41. I think consenting adults should be free to make their own reproductive decisions

that includes "renting out a womb" if the renter and the rent-ee are so inclined.

In this case, I certainly don't think the bio-parents can force the surrogate to get an abortion. I'm kind of of the 'inside your body it's your decision' mindset. I don't know what the legal arrangements are, but probably surro-mom can put the baby up for adoption if bio-parents back out. Or keep the baby herself.

[Statistical]

80. So you are for the govt telling what a woman can (or can't do) with her reproductive capabilities.

Kinda is anti-choice wouldn't you say.

If women have the right to choose (to have an abortion) shouldn't they also have the right to choose to be a surrogate?

[RobinA]

69. Nice, But....

there's a child involved in these situations. One who ends up paying the price for the infertility of some adults.

[CBR]

11. I love the self-righteous who have never dealt with infertility

It must feel good to be so smug!

[RainDog]

15. believe me, I have dealt with more than you probably ever will

and if I happen to think it's egotistical to choose a surrogate then that's my right. I don't care if you like it or not.

I think it's DISGUSTING for a woman to rent out her womb to the rich.

It's degrading. It's repulsive. And that's my opinion. again, if you don't like it, you don't.

I do have family members who dealt with infertility, btw. They adopted two wonderful kids. Those kids are my family and it doesn't matter whose dna they carry with them.

[CBR]

17. But YOU have not gone through infertility correct?

And you are making a lot of assumptions about what others go through as compared to you.

I don't like your opinion and I stated as such, which is my opinion.

[RainDog]

19. fine. we agree to disagree

I could ask if you had experienced the difficult things that I have, but it wouldn't matter b/c my experiences were not based upon the selfish assumption that I had the right to rent another human's body.

[CBR]

23. I could ask if you have experienced what I have but what is the point?

We were talking about a specific experience -- infertility, which you have not experienced and I have. It is horrible and painful. Unless you have gone through it, you do not get it.

[RainDog]

31. you're right. there is no point

if you could afford fertility treatments you are already better off than 99% of the world's population.

[CBR]

34. Insurance and I realize how lucky I am. nt

[Dorian Gray]

61. Hugs....

I also have experienced infertility issues (unexplained for three years). I hope that you've had a happy resolution to your trials, no matter what the outcome was.

[RainDog]

66. I apologize for my tone

and my general demeanor. honestly. sometimes online we're much more dogmatic than we would ever be in person and this is certainly one of those cases.

[Sheepshank]

82. self delete

[REP]

60. I have FSGS. Pregnancy would kill me.

And using another human being's body as a vending machine for your desires is disgusting. Beyond disgusting.

[wickerwoman]

39. Not everyone can adopt.

There are some pretty common medical conditions (like diabetes) that make it extremely unlikely that you will be allowed to adopt a child. Likewise if you have ever had cancer or any other life-threatening illnesses with even a moderate chance of recurring. Also if you have any kind of smudge on your criminal record (like busted for pot possession or got in a fight twenty years ago) you can forget about it.

There are a lot more people looking to adopt healthy children than there are children available in the US so the wait lists are long and agencies can be extremely picky. And not everyone has the resources to support an extremely ill child.

Who are you to judge what other people willingly choose to do with their own bodies? Do you think it's "disgusting" for a surrogate to carry a child for a gay couple?

[Sheepshank]

81. self delete

[Scout]

21. it must feel good to be martyr! n/t

[CBR]

25. I am not a damn martyr just someone who tried for 6 years to have

kids with no luck. Now I am pregnant and I used medical means and I am damn proud of it.

[Scout]

28. why is it something to be proud of? n/t

[CBR]

33. Why isn't it? I am proud to be carrying my husband and I's child. nt

[Scout]

38. so? why is that something to be proud of? whooo hooo, a woman is pregnant! n/t

[Warren DeMontague]

40. Being self-righteous, critical, and standing on a soapbox in judgment of other peoples choices

is DEFINITELY not something to be proud of.

[Scout]

43. you would know all about that Warren n/t

[Warren DeMontague]

45. Unlike some people, I'm pro-choice.

So no, I wouldn't.

Edit: Aside from maybe smoking inside bars and restaurants, I think you'll be hard pressed to find a place where I've 'sat in judgment of other peoples' personal choices'. But you're welcome to use the search function and prove me wrong. I'll wait.

[Scout]

47. you're not worth the effort Warren. n/t

[Warren DeMontague]

48. Translation: You know it's not there.

You thought you would toss off a cute "I know you are, but what am I" response.

Except, I'm not. And you, as demonstrated by your posts, clearly are.

[CBR]

42. Because my husband and I tried for years and went through a lot of pain. We are

experiencing the happiest moments of our lives. We are proud and joyous.

[Biker13]

63. Congratulations!

I'm very happy for you both, and I mean that sincerely!

Now, can DU suggest names? Do you know if it's a boy or a girl?

Biker's Old Lady

[Number23]

76. You are?? Congratulations!

That's wonderful! :hug:

And perhaps we should also be celebrating the fact that some of the horrible people in this thread have never had (and hopefully never will have) kids.

[cbdo2007]

72. Congrats!! My wife and I went through our own infertility ordeal....

recently and finally just had our IVF baby a few months ago. It is truly the most wonderful thing we have ever experienced.

Through our journey we have met many other couples who have gone through infertility as well - including ones who have done multiple IVF treatments, have adopted, and some who are still trying.

It's definitely not worth the fight with these people who really couldn't imagine all the pain and heartache you've been through. So many people take for granted how easy it is for them to get pregnant and how "easy" it would be for us all to just adopt (yeah right - we've got some friends now who have shelled out more than $30,000 and have been waiting for 2+ years on their Russian adoption *so far*)

Congrats again. When you're holding your little baby in your arms it will all have been worth it :)

[sohndrsmith]

56. I'm not sure I understand your argument (?). Having no experience with infertility myself, I do

have some familiarity with it (which I know is hardly comparative) so I can only empathize as best I can, and I do... even without going through it personally.

I do know that it is very painful (on every level), frustrating, expensive and unbelievably difficult.

I'm sorry anyone has to go through that, and I respect those who go through the process (many times, often) despite the difficulties and hardship in order to have a child.
I went through labor, (I'll never forgive my mother who said it was 'nothing' - my babies were twice the size of hers) and the 2-3 decades that follow are way harder than having the baby - by whatever means...

But I didn't see this argument as being one for or against how one's child ends up getting here (adoption, surrogacy, IVF, etc.) but the fact that the parents wanted to terminate the baby because of Down's Syndrome - which was something I was well aware of, since my husband's brother has Down's and it was certainly possible our baby might have it as well, even though mine was a plain old ordinary pregnancy I had (and yes, people do take for granted sometimes, sadly).

I refused to have the testing done for this, as the risk of harming the fetus was out of the question. It was never a consideration - even momentarily. Ever. I would no more dismiss a baby for having downs than I would for her having blue eyes or blonde hair....(oh, the agony!... the burden!... that would have been.../exactly/). So risking her health (or life!) to "know" when I'd find out for sure without risking her life with an invasive test. That said, I"m sure there are situations when having the test is recommended for some specific reasons. For us, there was no reason other than having a Down's BIL. Big whoop.

I couldn't do anything that deliberately compromised the health of my baby... (I was TOO healthy in my pregnancy - thus giving birth to Gigantor) : ). Oddly enough, she ended up in NICU for 5 days... she looked so out of place among all the other NICU babies, none of whom weighed more than 2 pounds - she was almost 12).

So maybe I'm missing something, as I didn't see the reference to infertility in the post you responded to... infertility isn't easy, and I can't even imagine what it's really like....

[tnlefty]

57. Well I did, and also dealt with not so good pregnancy outcomes,

which led me to state that anything that I deliver, even if it's a shoe, I'm keeping it. I couldn't be a surrogate, but most likely I wouldn't have been a candidate, (ha, I know I wouldn't have been), and I'm nt being smug.

[RobinA]

70. So...

It's OK to make infertility the problem of some child?

[lumberjack_jeff]

9. Exactly. n/t

[uncommon]

5. They can't force her to have an abortion, but she can't force them keep the baby either...

poor child.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pipi_k]

7. This is the sort of thing that happens...

when people who want a child don't consider that there are tons of kids out there waiting to be adopted.

No...it's got to be a biological child... :eyes:


So one more kid who would have loved a permanent home doesn't get one, and the other kid with Downs Syndrome becomes a pawn in a stupid battle between stupid adults.

[n2doc]

8. kick n/t

[saracat]

14. What a crock. The surrogate is a women who "rented" her womb

and the couple who rented want to back out. They should recompense her for back rent and nothing else. If she refuses to abort, I think the child should be her responsibility. The womb is hers but the embryo is their's to dispose of as they choose. This may sound cold but that is the way it is. I really do not understand those who go to this extent to have a biological child but that is their choice.I equally do not understand "surrogates" who rent themselves for money.I think the surrogate should just chalk this up to a business deal gone bad, as that is the position she put herself in.

[rug]

16. At what point does the embryo cease to be property?

[Scout]

20. when it becomes a person. n/t

[rug]

22. Which is when?

And who chooses until then?

[Scout]

24. the actual person whose body it's leeching off of, ie the pregnant woman

and it becomes a person after it's born.

[rug]

26. So, ownership of the embryo passes from the donors to the surrogate at the moment of implantation?

[Scout]

27. yes, it's in her body. n/t

[rug]

29. Who pays for it after it becomes a person?

[SoCalDem]

30. yes.. It's their DNA

and they are paying someone to gestate the fetus for them.. The surrogate agreed to "rent" her womb, in exchange for money, but the child IN her is NOT hers..It is not "of" her.

Some surrogates do bond with the child they carry, and some have tried to back out of the agreement, but the child they carry is not related to the mother, so I would assume that a court would side with the biological parents.

She might even have to legally adopt a surrogacy child if she decided to keep an unwanted child.

thorny issue allround:(

[rug]

32. That would mean they retain ownership even after implantation.

[SoCalDem]

36. They do...except for the fact that the woman who is the "vessel"

does have control over the conditions within her body..

If she took drugs & the fetus was damaged
If she was careless and harmed the fetus
she would be in breach of contract

If there was a stillbirth and there were no extenuating circumstances or if she had a spontaneous miscarriage, she would probably not be in breach of contract.

If the couple who paid her to carry their child who had a defect that was directly related to THEM, decided that they did not want the child, I suppose they would be at least financially responsible for that child, if the surrogate refused to abort it.
Potential surrogates need to think this through BEFORE they take that money.

What surprises me, is that there was not testing done on the embryo BEFORE implantation...the condition would have been there from the beginning.

[LisaL]

51. So if a man doesn't want a child does he have a right

to force his girlfriend/wife to have an abortion? After all half of DNA in the baby is his. Following that logic he has a right to decide what should be done, no?

[HEyHEY]

77. I certainly think the man has a right to his opinion

This idea that we should just shut up and let other people control our fate is not acceptable. I by no means think a man should demand anything, however, to just demand we say "Whatever you say, dear" is taking it too far, it affects us too and we should be allowed to voice our opinion.

[sohndrsmith]

35. How? Why? How tragic. Anyone who has ever had the good fortune to have

met, get to know, have relatives or friends and personal experiences with someone with Down's would likely have no concept of such a person as being anything but a gift to the world - enriching anyone's life when lucky enough to get to know them.

Good grief... If Down's syndrome is the *sole* reason these people wanted to eliminate the fetus, I wish they could be assigned to work at a supervised residence or spend a good deal of time with kids/grownups with Down's. I can't imagine anyone having the same frame of mind after doing so...

Perhaps I'm missing something... but many of us could learn a lot from the positivity of those (at least those I've met and have known for decades) with Downs. What a soul full of sunshine my BIL has... his SO friends equally so.

[SoCalDem]

37. People who have to use extraordinary measures to have a child

and for whom that child may be the ONLY child, would probably less likely to "accept" a child that was not their "Dream Baby".

Everyone wants a "dream baby", but in life..you get what you get..

and even "dream babies" can (and DO) still get sick or injured, so there are no guarantees, but for a couple who have saved and then have spent an enormous amount of time, money & energy, I can see how some may accept nothing less than the very best.(in their estimation).

The clinics who do fertility treatments and surrogacy need to be held to an extremely high standard so these types of occurrences don't happen.

There will be no "winners" here:(

[sohndrsmith]

62. some Down's parents might argue that theirs *are* dream babies...

but you're right.... it is a sad situation all around...

No babies are perfect, no matter how perfect they "look". My daughter had a difficult LD (but she was physically healthy and beautiful - aside from the hereditary blood disorder I passed on to her which nearly cost me my life... and wasn't aware of until she was about 8 months old).

Some children are beautiful and healthy looking, "Gerber babies" if you will... but have emotional problems and end up killing someone over some coke and spend many, many years behind bars. (Speaking of a schoolmate of mine, who's name was, actually... Gerber).

I don't know... I just think of Downs kids (my BIL, who is a year younger that I am but shares the same birthday is, like me in his 4th decade, but I - and he - think of himself as a kid, unless he's sweet on a girl. <g>) as gifts, and my life is far better knowing him and meeting his friends. I guess that's my bias, and an unfair one at that, but man... I *wish* more "normal" people had half the integrity and optimism that seems to be a "symptom" of the disorder (I'm sure it's not the case in everyone, but it's been my experience - and that of my parents who both taught Down's kids in a Headstart type of program when launching their careers...

...sigh...

[Warren DeMontague]

44. I wonder if everyone here yelling & screaming about what a travesty this is

is equally outraged about the women who abort pregnancies where abnormalities are detected in their own bodies.

I'm not, but then, I'm pro-choice.

But given the level of outrage in this thread, you would think it's only parents using a surrogate who, quote, 'want the perfect baby'. No, actually, large #s of women who are pregnant at age 35 and up get amnio and other tests, primarily to determine things like Down Syndrome. When detected, lots of those women choose to abort.

Does that make them 'selfish, horrible people who don't want a child, they want an accessory'? I don't think so. And what a terribly unprogressive, anti-choice, judgmental thing to post on a Democratic site.

[sohndrsmith]

46. Most people with Down's now live into their 50's - by the time this

child is in his/her teens or twenties, I expect that number to increase... as it has consistently with advances in knowledge of the syndrome.

In other words, unless there are specifics left out that show a likely stillbirth or some other untenable health issue, the outcome seems most likely to be the birth of a (maybe somewhat more fragile/delicate in infancy - though not necessarily) healthy baby boy or girl who happens to have Down's.

The article claims the reason the parents wanted to terminate was Down's. What specifically about Down's would they find that decision reasonable? Barring serious problems that would end in the baby's death and they want to spare suffering or pain (which is unlikely related to or caused by the extra chromosome) this just seems like a choice made by ignorant, uninformed, narcissistic would-be parents who - like any parents - don't get to pre-order perfect babies. One could have a "Gerber baby", perfect and beautiful in every way, who develops serious, family-and-life altering health or behavioural issues by pre-school age... surrogate born or not, we don't get to choose, get a refund or (ugh) terminate when we find out our child isn't perfect (newsflash... every baby/person/kid/human is imperfect...).

The best outcome for these people would be to have and raise the child, and learn the priceless life lessons from their Down's child that they weren't able to figure out on their own - and end up feeling disbelief that they ever considered their child disposable...

[Scout]

49. wow, now THERE'S a self-righteous post for you Warren.

aren't you pro-choice? if they didn't want a child with Down Syndrome, what business is it of yours?

[LisaL]

50. The problem is, somebody else is carrying the child.

The argument for abortion always goes: her body, her decision. Since the woman carries the child in her body, then following that logic it has to be her decision and not up to anyone else. How exactly can a woman be forced to have an abortion?

[Warren DeMontague]

53. She can't be forced to have an abortion, absolutely not.

However, I think it's disingenuous to complain that the bio-parents here 'want the perfect baby' when lots of women take the same attitude about their own pregnancies.

[Warren DeMontague]

52. My point, exactly.

You didn't think I wrote that post, did you? I wrote the one above it.


I just think people need to be consistent. Look around the thread at the people complaining about the parents using the surrogate 'wanting the perfect baby', and you can probably figure out the inconsistency.

[LisaL]

54. Actually it is inconsistent to suggest the bio parents

should be able to force the surrogate to abort the fetus. While she carries it in her body, then shouldn't it be her choice and her choice alone?
After all, we don't allow the father of the fetus to force the mother of the fetus to have an abortion, because since it's her body, it's her choice.

[Warren DeMontague]

55. I haven't seen anyone suggest the bio-parents should be able to force the surrogate to abort.

I certainly haven't.

[LisaL]

58. Since we agree that she can not be forced to have an abortion,

why shouldn't the bio parents be obligated to support the child? Again, if the father did not want the child, but the mother refused to have an abortion, the man would be obligated to pay child support regardless of the fact that he did not want the child.
Using that logic, why shouldn't bio parents be obligated to support the child?

[Warren DeMontague]

67. I'm not sure what the legal ramifications and responsibilities are, re: Surrogates.

I think it's reasonable to say that, if the contract- such as it is- is being broken, the surro-mom can take care of the baby herself, or put it up for adoption.. I think when you're talking about child support, you're certainly getting into a legal gray area.

I don't honestly know.

[sohndrsmith]

59. wow, now THERE'S a presumptuous, unfair post for you Sgt. Friday.

aren't you pro-discourse?

What makes you think I'm pro-choice, pro-life, pro-gressive, pro-ductive, pro-active, or pro-digious? Or not?

You're right, I suppose... so my apologies. It is none of my business that someone wants to terminate a child for the sole reason that he/she has Down's. I passionately disagree with that choice, though what business is that of yours?

I am pro-choice, so you guessed right. And I have daughters (one of whom flew 2000 miles to me because she was scared and thought she may have been pregnant).

Many too-young women are not equipped (emotionally, financially or logistically) for 2-3 decades of motherhood (there are some that manage to do it - and do it better than those older, more secure and seemingly capable, so there are no absolutes, in this or any situation, really).

But yes - guilty as charged - I find it hard to be unmoved by a story of a couple, potential parents who have not only planned to have a child but have gone to the lengths this couple did to make that happen. Yes, guilty again, of assuming they were capable (materially, emotionally, financially, parentally) of caring for their child once he/she was born.

But upon finding out the child *might* have Down's... wanted to terminate it. More assumptions on my part: that they likely did not have much, if any, experience with Down's kids... if they did, I'm even more confused.

They were prepared and planned more than most do - for this baby... and upon finding it wasn't perfectly "normal", wanted it's life to end - when it sounds like there was an option for the surrogate to have the baby so that grateful parents could adopt him/her... or keep the child as her own. But the parents, refusing to have the child themselves seemed oddly protective that the child who's life they wanted to end - in refusing anyone else to give it a loving home and life.

I don't understand that. Sorry. I am pro-choice - absolutely. But having an abortion is not a tooth extraction, it's a big deal (though I can only speak from personal experience). I will never get over it, the feeling that hit me doubly hard when I had my first child - under less than ideal circumstances, as he was actively cheating on me and we weren't together when I found out she was there... Got married and the obsessive cheating remained his 2nd full-time job, I found out <g>).

What if this couple had a perfect "looking" baby who at age 3 or 7 was found to have severe psychological disabilities - or a physical disease that would lead to complete disability, deformity, paralysis - whatever.... by age 10. I guess they'd want a refund?

I guess I don't see Down's as a horrible fate - for parent or child, based on my life and years and gratefulness of being lucky enough to have a Down's person in my life and family. I feel blessed, not burdened. So there you go.

So there you go... put that in your pipe and smoke it. : )

[wisteria]

64. I say the couple who contracted with the surrogate should be responsible for the child-

disability or not. Children aren't made to order.

[tammywammy]

65. +1 n/t

[RobinA]

71. Agreed

It comes from making this pact with the devil. I would hope that they'd put the child up for adoption so that he/she at least has a chance of being raised by a family who loves him/her.

[saracat]

73. Apparently they are. They ordered one.It happens to be defective.

Sorry this is very callous and I am not saying I agree, but the parents had this child custom made and it didn't work out as planned.I say this is their product and if they no longer want it, they should be able to ask that it be terminated in the early stages. If the surrogate doesn't want to terminate this pregnancy, she should be responsible. The parents do not want this product.The surrogate should take responsibility if she wants the embryo developed and delivered.

[LisaL]

74. While it's in her body, it's her responsibility.

When it comes out, why shouldn't people who created it be responsible? By the same token a father is responsible for child support even if he did not want the child. As for it not working out as planned, well, sorry, a lot of things don't work out as planned.

[Warren DeMontague]

75. Don't couples put babies up for adoption all the time?

If they're "responsible", they should be able to put the baby up for adoption. If she wants to adopt, they're not responsible. You have child support issues when one parent wants to keep the kid and the other doesn't. You seem to be suggesting that this kid has 3 parents.

[saracat]

79. Good argument but it can also be turned around on the woman who chose to be a "rent a womb'.

The couple want to cancel their rental.Thats the way I see it. I think they should pay her for the inconvinience and she should get an abortion. If she chooses not to, she should bear responsibility for the child. But this is a sticky wicket, I agree.

[HEyHEY]

78. Why are people so sticky about having "Their" baby

Look, I'm not infertile, but I like to think if I were that I would adopt a kid who needs to get out of some third world hellhole or something.

[cbdo2007]

83. You're right. Even people without infertility problems should adopt rather than trying to have their

own kids.