Surrogate without a medical reason?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Depends on state law.

+ 1 This is the correct answer. Surrogacy law differs by state. In some places it’s entirely illegal. Other states allow it. Some other states allow it, but only under certain circumstances.

Our GC was in CA. I did not have to provide proof of medical necessity, though I easily could have.

[Anonymous]

Many REs will only do a transfer to a gestational carrier (GC) if you can show medical need. If you are doing donor egg through an agency, the agency will probably also require you show medical need if you're intending to implant in a GC. (GC is preferred to the term "surrogate" usually because of the confusion with traditional surrogacy, where the surrogate is also providing the egg).

However, unexplained secondary fertility issues absolutely do count as medical need. You just need your RE to document that for you and you're good to go.

It is extremely expensive, though! And slower, because you will be required to freeze your DE embryo for 6 months, I think, by regulation, before you can implant in the GC.

(I have had a child via DE+GC. I have a functioning uterus but for other reasons was not medically able to carry.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, why wouldn’t you be able to be?

You need a medical reason to use a surrogate. You can’t use a surrogate just because you don’t want to be pregnant. OP understands that but I don’t think a lot of the people responding understand that. Which means, OP, that I think you need to ask a doctor and not DCUM. If you have high blood pressure or something in addition to being 44, that might be enough of a reason.

I have a friend who had a very difficult first pregnancy with constant vomiting and also has a cardiac issue. She wanted to pursue surrogacy for her second pregnancy but neither her OB nor her cardiologist would say her life or health were at risk from a second pregnancy. I’m sure she could have found SOME doctor to do the paperwork probably? But she stopped pursuing it at that point and carried herself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, why wouldn’t you be able to be?

You need a medical reason to use a surrogate. You can’t use a surrogate just because you don’t want to be pregnant. OP understands that but I don’t think a lot of the people responding understand that. Which means, OP, that I think you need to ask a doctor and not DCUM. If you have high blood pressure or something in addition to being 44, that might be enough of a reason.

I have a friend who had a very difficult first pregnancy with constant vomiting and also has a cardiac issue. She wanted to pursue surrogacy for her second pregnancy but neither her OB nor her cardiologist would say her life or health were at risk from a second pregnancy. I’m sure she could have found SOME doctor to do the paperwork probably? But she stopped pursuing it at that point and carried herself.

OP pursued fertility treatments for five years without success. That's enough medical necessity.

[Anonymous]

Depends on the doctor; depends on the state law; depends on whether you can find a surrogate to work with you. All of these issues can be overcome, but it might take time and some traveling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, why wouldn’t you be able to be?

You need a medical reason to use a surrogate. You can’t use a surrogate just because you don’t want to be pregnant. OP understands that but I don’t think a lot of the people responding understand that. Which means, OP, that I think you need to ask a doctor and not DCUM. If you have high blood pressure or something in addition to being 44, that might be enough of a reason.

I have a friend who had a very difficult first pregnancy with constant vomiting and also has a cardiac issue. She wanted to pursue surrogacy for her second pregnancy but neither her OB nor her cardiologist would say her life or health were at risk from a second pregnancy. I’m sure she could have found SOME doctor to do the paperwork probably? But she stopped pursuing it at that point and carried herself.

That is not universally true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Depends on the doctor; depends on the state law; depends on whether you can find a surrogate to work with you. All of these issues can be overcome, but it might take time and some traveling.

This. Not sure why others keep claiming otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Many REs will only do a transfer to a gestational carrier (GC) if you can show medical need. If you are doing donor egg through an agency, the agency will probably also require you show medical need if you're intending to implant in a GC. (GC is preferred to the term "surrogate" usually because of the confusion with traditional surrogacy, where the surrogate is also providing the egg).

However, unexplained secondary fertility issues absolutely do count as medical need. You just need your RE to document that for you and you're good to go.

It is extremely expensive, though! And slower, because you will be required to freeze your DE embryo for 6 months, I think, by regulation, before you can implant in the GC.

(I have had a child via DE+GC. I have a functioning uterus but for other reasons was not medically able to carry.)

This might be true in some cases, but I can say it isn't universally true. I'm in the process right now of using a DE and GC, and this hasn't been the case for us.

I do agree it's expensive!!!

Good luck, OP!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Many REs will only do a transfer to a gestational carrier (GC) if you can show medical need. If you are doing donor egg through an agency, the agency will probably also require you show medical need if you're intending to implant in a GC. (GC is preferred to the term "surrogate" usually because of the confusion with traditional surrogacy, where the surrogate is also providing the egg).

However, unexplained secondary fertility issues absolutely do count as medical need. You just need your RE to document that for you and you're good to go.

It is extremely expensive, though! And slower, because you will be required to freeze your DE embryo for 6 months, I think, by regulation, before you can implant in the GC.

(I have had a child via DE+GC. I have a functioning uterus but for other reasons was not medically able to carry.)

We had to use a GC and fresh donor egg. We went straight to transfer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm 44. We have one child who I got pregnant with easily and then TTC #2 for 8 years with zero success. We did infertility treatments for the first 5 years and then TTC on our own for 3 years. I never got pregnant even once in all that time.

I received a diagnosis of "unexplained secondary infertility." To my knowledge, there is nothing wrong with my uterus. DH and I have now decided we want to try with donor eggs but due to my advanced maternal age we don't think we want me to try to become pregnant with DE. Can we work with a surrogate without a medical reason?

I think advanced maternal age might be enough of a medical reason for some doctors. I was advised to use a surrogate by a couple MFMs. Main risk factors were advanced maternal age. But I did also have a prior laparoscopic myomectomy so that may have factored into the recommendation as well. But I still think my age was also a major factor in the decision since there are plenty of risks that go up with age e.g. preeclampsia, etc. (I first saw one at 45 and then ended up getting pregnant at age 47 - I didn't follow the surrogacy advice).

[Anonymous]

I live in LA and people do that here all the time, for vanity reasons. You’re good!

[Anonymous]

I don't understand why women think its okay to put other women through this when its not an absolute necessary. You do realize most surrogates are from economically weaker section of society, right? This is not surrogacy, its rent-a-womb. When did this become a norm, to just willy-nilly rent-a-womb?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I live in LA and people do that here all the time, for vanity reasons. You’re good!

Ewwww...that is never okay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why women think its okay to put other women through this when its not an absolute necessary. You do realize most surrogates are from economically weaker section of society, right? This is not surrogacy, its rent-a-womb. When did this become a norm, to just willy-nilly rent-a-womb?

Yeah, you'd rather those "economically weaker" women instead get themselves a second or third service job so you can get your french fries and manicures more easily, wouldn't you? Talk about gross. Women of any economic background are sentient beings who can make their own choices about what to do with their bodies without your patronizing input and control, thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why women think its okay to put other women through this when its not an absolute necessary. You do realize most surrogates are from economically weaker section of society, right? This is not surrogacy, its rent-a-womb. When did this become a norm, to just willy-nilly rent-a-womb?

Yeah, you'd rather those "economically weaker" women instead get themselves a second or third service job so you can get your french fries and manicures more easily, wouldn't you? Talk about gross. Women of any economic background are sentient beings who can make their own choices about what to do with their bodies without your patronizing input and control, thanks.

Am so sorry. I bow down to your intelligence. Because, a service job that you can change at will is the same thing as dedicating 9+ months of your life to carrying someone else's baby, including the medically induced physiological changes it ties you in with. Of course, the emotional weight of working in the service industry is the same damn thing as having to carry and then give away a little human being nurtured by your own body. The risks? Pfft...whats the big deal that the medications might cause depression, menopause, gestational diabetes, hypertension, and god forbid loss of reproductive organs or even life.

Sure women of any economic background are sentient beings - except if the woman of economically weaker background had other means of earning the surrogacy money, she would not be putting herself through surrogacy. But hey "lets not patronize them", lets just take advantage of them.

I swear to god, some women will justify anything if its in their favor. Surrogacy was supposed to be for women who had a critical need for this very humanitarian service AFTER a medical need was well established. But no, we are now in the realm of handmaid's tale. One poster says women are now doing it for vanity sake, so its okay. Another who already has a child, and no established medical need just wants to try it. Sure lets just try putting a poor women through surrogacy, trial and error is affordable for us, to hell with her health. Yeah!!!!

Believe me, I know the pain of fertility, I am there too. But please pause, think, and proceed with caution and empathy. If you were to proceed with DE, even with somebody else's baby inside you, you would consider yourself the mother - emotionally and physically. Don't disregard this same effect of surrogates. Be very cognizant of what it is you are asking these women to do for you. Vanity, and Trial&Error are not good enough reasons for it.

PS. I am so glad countries like India have now passed strict surrogacy laws.