Poll: Should surrogacy be available for fertile, straight couples.

Lieju

New member
Jan 4, 2009
3,044
0
0
Ronald Nand said:
She also finds it selfish that the woman wants the child but is unwilling to do the birth.
So does she find every man in history who wanted children to be selfish, then?

Retrograde said:
No sir, we don't give a fuck about children, what we care about is female breeding instinct. Not every woman wants babies to be sure, but most do. And they don't want to raise a person, they don't want to create a life, they want to have and birth as many babies as they possibly can because that's what their biology demands of them. We're a breeding mammal, like rats and rabbits, it's a part of what makes us so successful. But we're 7 billion people in and that shits starting to sting.
Men have no part in this bussiness, then?
Besides, humans are social animals, we want to preserve our genes but we also want to preserve our ideas and make sure our offspring will continue that. We aren't biologically programmed to just push them out as much as we can, we have few children compared to most mammals (not even comparing to something like invertebrates, but compare us to rats for example who have litters of 10 on average, while humans usually only give birth to one baby at a time) and compensate by taking care of our offspring for longer and teaching them our culture, language, and having these social groups to support them.
 

Angie7F

WiseGurl
Nov 11, 2011
1,704
0
0
i say why not?
If surrogacy becomes natural for all couples, it will make it easier for people to make use of it and everyone can benefit from it.
Taking nine months out of a persons life is so demanding. If women with a sucessful career can have surrogates, they can keep making money and have kids.
I dont see what can possibly be wrong about it.
 

Lilani

Sometimes known as CaitieLou
May 27, 2009
6,581
0
0
Ronald Nand said:
Anyway this got me thinking should surrogacy be an option for a fertile straight couple?
Well clearly it already is an option. I think the question you're looking for is, "What do you think of straight, fertile couples who use surrogacy?"
 

dogenzakaminion

New member
Jun 15, 2010
669
0
0
To a point, I think, "Yeah why not? The surrogates are not being forced." For fertile couples that want to avid hereditary diseases it should be allowed, and like the example above, older women who found love late in life (for example) could still have children.

Not sure how surrogacy functions with healthcare systems. I can see that being an issue to people, otherwise fertile couples using healthcare for "convenience".
 

DC1

New member
Jun 8, 2009
132
0
0
Retrograde said:
Wickatricka said:
Why not adopt then? Seems like it would be better then bringing another child into the world.
snip
I agree with a lot of what Retrograde is saying, even though the general public would think we're crazy for thinking like this. But I think if you can raise a child to be a productive member of society there's no problem. These Bollywood actors probably could do that because they have more money and more opportunities for their offspring. Most people who have kids now, I feel have no idea what they're doing, and they tend to raise little shitheads.
 

kortin

New member
Mar 18, 2011
1,512
0
0
Retrograde said:
I clicked no, but not because I particularly give a shit exactly how people continue to breed us into inevitable societal meltdown, I just wish someone would get about installing breeding licenses, or that some influential people would go about propagating the idea that breeding is in fact, NOT a right, NOT something every single person is capable of or wants to do, and that raising spawn isn't for everyone.

Seriously, control your breeding or we're properly fucked in couple of centuries, tops.
Dear god, I hope you're not one of those people who irrationally label people who choose to have kids as "breeders" and consider them scum. Because you definitely sound like one of those kinds of people.
 

Phasmal

Sailor Jupiter Woman
Jun 10, 2011
3,676
0
0
Just because you've had kids before doesn't mean you necessarily can again.
I know a few women who have been advised not to have any more children biologically because of complications with their last pregnancy.

And either way, if they've got the money, who cares? Sure they should.
People are too quick to stick their oar in other people's business. It may offend your mum, but nobody's asking her permission.
 

Snowbell

New member
Apr 13, 2012
419
0
0
I have a perfectly functioning womb (to my knowledge), but crippling depression. Carrying a baby is super stressful and I really don't want to get post-portem depression which could very well end in my death - or worse, the death of my child.

I intend to have on child surrogated because I want to have a child with my to-be husband, and I don't see anything wrong with that.
 

EvilRoy

The face I make when I see unguarded pie.
Legacy
Jan 9, 2011
1,840
537
118
One of my bio professors many years ago brought this up as a point of discussion on a moral basis, although the question was framed more as "Is surrogating okay". It lead to a very interesting discussion, but generally boiled down to two primary questions:

1) why is the surrogate willing to do this;
2) why is the mother seeking a surrogate

In the case of 1) the problem is whether the surrogate mother is 'renting' their body as an act of desperation (money), with intention to perform criminal action (extortion, kidnapping), or as a more intrusive part time job.

In the case of 2) the questions become somewhat more difficult. If the mother seeks to employ a surrogate due to emotional, financial, or time problems the question must be asked whether this person can ethically be considered fit to act as a parent, as there may be no reason to believe these personal issues will be solved by the time the child has arrived. If the decision to employ a surrogate is based simply on comfort then there should be no problem, but unfortunately there is still more to deal with.

In terms of liability should a miscarriage occur or non-genetic disorder appear in the child, is it the responsibility of the surrogate mother? In these cases is the surrogate mother still entitled to pay despite the failure to deliver a working 'product'? Should the surrogate mother be allowed to forfeit her pay and choose not to deliver services rendered?

I can only imagine the size of the contracts one must sign in order to enter into this kind of agreement, especially given the nature of the 'product' as a living being.
 

HardkorSB

New member
Mar 18, 2010
1,477
0
0
Ronald Nand said:
Anyway this got me thinking should surrogacy be an option for a fertile straight couple?
As far as I'm aware, there are more kids in need of adoption than there are parents who want to adopt a kid, otherwise surrogacy wouldn't be a thing.
Why would you want to make that gap even bigger?
 

spartan231490

New member
Jan 14, 2010
5,186
0
0
I have a dream. I dream of a world where consenting adults will be able to do whatever the hell they want without anyone else judging them just to feel superior . . .


Yeah, that'll never happen.
 

Dirge Eterna

New member
Apr 13, 2013
290
0
0
They are free to pursue that option but if it was someone I knew I would encourage them to look at adoption first. Too many people want a brand new baby and the older kids get kicked to the curb. I am adopted and my wife and I have 1 child biologically, we want to adopt a child around the same age as our son who is 6. I have always wanted to adopt even before I had a child to give someone else the opportunity to find a family. My childhood wasn't perfect but it was much better than being in an orphanage or a group home.