We were shocked by published responses to the Law Commission Consultation, revealing the dark heart of the surrogacy industry.
This response from a NHS OBG deserves a thread of its own.
NHSOBG hasn’t time to read the full 500 page consultation but they think its “a very good thing”.
They refer to the Surrogate Mother as “The Host”.
When NHSOBG says “it’s difficult to imagine a situation where invasive tests could not be anything other than the choice of the host” one senses they wish this wasn’t so, reserving sympathy for the Commissioning Parents (referred to as Intended Parents or IPs).
“it was difficult for the intended parents as they had no say in the decision whether to have it performed”
Those poor CP’s , with no say in the decision to perform an invasive test on the pregnant woman carrying the baby.
When the relationship between the Surrogate Mother and the CPs breaks down, all sympathy is reserved for those CPs who had no legal rights over a still born baby delivered by a woman who NHSOBG fails to understand may have been somewhat distressed by the situation
When problems arise in a pregnancy, and CPs possibly demonstrate more concern for “their baby/ies than for the woman hired to gestate them, and maybe attempt to dictate medical treatment, it should be no surprise that the relationship between parties should become strained.
These complex cases are all picked up by the NHS, investing the best of fetal medicine and NICU facilities for premature babies. But CPs expect sick babies to be transferred free of charge to a nearby NICU to suit their convenience.#Surrogacy
A long ambulance journey, with attendant paediatrician and paediatric nurse. Presumably as the Surrogate Mother was the legal mother, this lead to argument over funding the transfer to a hospital that wasn’t the local hospital of the SM. Assuming the availability of a NICU cot.
NHSOBG also seems to think the act of surrogacy removes a Surrogate Mother’s right to privacy and control over the sharing of her own medical history.
NHSOBG doesn’t seem to realise that the pregnant woman is the patient to which they owe a duty of care. The one person who should be at the centre of all decision making. A woman who will grieve a still born baby. And a woman whose informed consent and privacy are a human right.
It is truly shocking and chilling to think NHSOBGs have attitudes like this.
Surrogate Mothers deserve better.
Aagh. I hate a grammar fail! “To whom”!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Nowhere is the callous nature more apparent than in the Law Commission discussions around still birth.
We apologise in advance for the upsetting nature of this thread and advise caution if you are grieving baby loss.
#surrogacy
In the Law Commission consultation paper it was proposed that commissioning parents would be the legal parents of any stillborn baby.
Researching the responses to the consultation paper has shown differing views relating to such a sad event.
Whilst the majority of respondents opposed the suggestion, most commissioning (intended) parents were in agreement.
1. 1.We attended court last November to support this Surrogate Mother (SM) in the case to ‘set aside’ the Parental Order. We understand this case to be a one of a kind which was won on the basis of consent which we will explore in an upcoming blog but first some background…
2. The SM’s relationship with newly-introduced Commissioning Parents (CPs) progressed quickly and the first donor egg conceived embryo was transferred within 6 months. There was no long history of friendship and this all took place without guidance of an agency. #surrogacy
Thread: The gift of life. Is there any appropriate repayment for such a gift? In USA whilst commercial surrogacy is awash with tropes of surrogate mothers as “angels” giving the “gift of life” payment in the region of $30-50 K is the norm. Why be generous with a post birth gift?
In the UK the “altruistic” concept is carefully nurtured, with payment limited to “reasonable” expenses only, so post birth “gifts” are expected to be more generous.
A recuperative holiday is the norm, approved by a judge.
It’s funny how those “reasonable expenses” so often add up to a going rate of around £15,000.
Norwegian Minister for Children and Families Kjersti Toppe says that as it illegal to use a surrogate mother in Norway it should not be permitted to use a surrogate mother abroad. worldakkam.com/norwegian-fami…
Toppe said that she wanted to criminalize the use of surrogate mothers abroad: “... the disciplinary provisions form *an attitude* and support the seriousness of the legal provisions. The important thing is to clarify that *this is prohibited*."
This follows the statement on surrogacy from Ukraine's Children Ombudsman, Mykola Kuleba, calling #surrogacy the “exploitation and slavery of women who decide to become a surrogate mother" and “making money on the sale of children”. #babybuying
Really interesting 168-strong survey, though a shame that only 2 surrogate mothers responded, so with an unintentional focus on those who benefit from #surrogacy it collects key data with balance provided. Our analysis follows. Epic 🧵 1.
2. Same sex respondents (9), 5 admit to using ‘legal loopholes’ to access #commercialsurrogacy in #Ukraine – laws there only permit infertile heterosexual couples to apply for #surrogacy
3. Reason for choosing #surrogacy: #adoption was restricted or not available (this refers to other countries, UK does not discriminate legally against same-sex couples) but #surrogacy can be either expensive or cheap.