Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I can’t people people hear about human trafficking via surrogacy and are like “eh NBD”.
The world is truly f***ed.
Who is saying this is no big deal you dimwit? No one!!!
However,
there is a place for ethical surrogacy. Find better examples than this if you want to advocate against surrogacy.
Yeah, like when an actress doesn’t want to risk stretchmarks?
You must live under a rock. My boss and his wife are expecting a child via a surrogate. She almost died giving birth to their first child.
Why do they absolutely need two children? Plenty of people stop after one.
Because they want two children? Why did you want any? Some people don't have any.
I don't accept your premise that surrogacy is unambiguously positive. I'm open to the possibility that some situations may justify the harms associated with surrogacy, but simply wanting a second child after a medically complex first pregnancy doesn't meet that standard for me.
I don't accept your premise that any pregnancy is unambiguously positive. Surrogacy is but one way to have children. No one actually needs to have a child.
All true. There are risks to anything one does in life. So there have to be rules and laws. Surrogacy is not a bad way to have kids, any worse than other ways. But I am a strong proponent of a federal database for surrogacy, to keep track of who is entering into contracts with whom. That seems like common sense to me, to preserve the safety of the surrogates, the babies and make sure the babies aren't ending up with families who don't have their best interests at heart. Just like sperm centers should have a capped maximum for donations and utilization of sperm per donor, as is the law in several countries, so that one donor doesn't produce too many children who could then inadvertently cause inbreeding (a real risk, apparently).