Would you pay 200K for a baby that isn't biologically yours?

[Anonymous]

Extrafamilial adoption is trauma, so if this is the alternative, I’m good with that.

[Anonymous]

Anyone who flippantly can say that extrafamilial adoption is trauma didn't grow up in an abusive household. There definitely could be more support for that, but there should definitely be more adoptions than we are aware of.

[Anonymous]

Yes, if I had the money. We probably spent half that trying to adopt. Several scummy attorneys, two corrupt agencies, one facilitator who was also a scam…so, it if was guaranteed and we could, absolutely. If you have a child and it came easy you don’t get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No, I believe human trafficking should be illegal. Including when gay men do it.

How is this human trafficking?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“Just adopt” was an option 30 years ago. It’s NOT now. Do you know anyone who has pursued adoption lately? There are way, way more families interested in adopting than there are babies to adopt. In many cases, it’s basically not an option.

One friend of mine spoke to several adoption agencies in her area (not local) and was told that there are 25 families that have paid the fees, done the home visits, jumped through all the hoops, and are now approved for every one baby that is put up for adoption.

I have another friend, local, who was told she could only adopt if she was open to adopting a baby who had been exposed to drugs or alcohol prenatally. She did move forward, and was able to successfully adopt a baby from a mom with some drug use. So far, baby seems great and healthy, but obviously, there’s no telling what the future holds.

These are married, stable, high income, loving homes.

So yeah, if I had the money, I’d do it. It’s probably your only way to have a baby.

+1 there are basically no healthy newborns or even toddlers up for adoption. International adoptions have been severely curtailed. Then you have people who think that all adoptions are “trauma,” And I’m pretty sure in a few years’ time there will be some kind of unfortunate backlash against adopted kids/families because of it, sadly. Shelling out 100k+ on fertility treatments and/or even more $$$ on a surrogate is the only way. Unfortunately.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We did and we have no regrets.
Donor egg, donor sperm and surrogate at the end of a very long and painful IVF journey.

Are you the woman? Did you have any hesitation over the idea that it's only biologically yours husbands child?

We used donor egg and donor sperm, so it’s neither my husband’s nor my biological child. I didn’t believe it when everyone told us it wouldn’t matter once our child was actually born, but it’s true.

I do believe that's true. Did you explore adoption and was there a reason you decided against it vs surrogate?

We had already spent 7 years doing IVF with our own eggs and sperm. Our financial resources were finite. We did the home study for adoption at the time we were at the fork in the road. The prospect of spending another indefinite number of years on domestic or international adoption vs. the one-year timeline for surrogate+donor IVF seemed more feasible and sure. We were already in our early forties and didn’t have any bandwidth left to deal with that much uncertainty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, I believe human trafficking should be illegal. Including when gay men do it.

How is this human trafficking?

What else is buying a human being?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I say this not so nicely, OP. You are an ugly person and you may need to stop and think why the universe isn’t allowing you to produce a child. You are not happy for her. You are jealous. Maybe they can spend that money easily and you are struggling to afford one round. Maybe your husband thinks it’s not worth it to spend that much money on someone so broken as you, inside and out. Let that family be.

DP. You’re not that nice of a person either, as that ^^^ demonstrates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, I believe human trafficking should be illegal. Including when gay men do it.

How is this human trafficking?

What else is buying a human being?

Are you a Marxist? This is paying someone for their physical labor. Or are you against all forms of IVF, which is buying a human being?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Just adopt” was an option 30 years ago. It’s NOT now. Do you know anyone who has pursued adoption lately? There are way, way more families interested in adopting than there are babies to adopt. In many cases, it’s basically not an option.

One friend of mine spoke to several adoption agencies in her area (not local) and was told that there are 25 families that have paid the fees, done the home visits, jumped through all the hoops, and are now approved for every one baby that is put up for adoption.

I have another friend, local, who was told she could only adopt if she was open to adopting a baby who had been exposed to drugs or alcohol prenatally. She did move forward, and was able to successfully adopt a baby from a mom with some drug use. So far, baby seems great and healthy, but obviously, there’s no telling what the future holds.

These are married, stable, high income, loving homes.

So yeah, if I had the money, I’d do it. It’s probably your only way to have a baby.

+1 there are basically no healthy newborns or even toddlers up for adoption. International adoptions have been severely curtailed. Then you have people who think that all adoptions are “trauma,” And I’m pretty sure in a few years’ time there will be some kind of unfortunate backlash against adopted kids/families because of it, sadly. Shelling out 100k+ on fertility treatments and/or even more $$$ on a surrogate is the only way. Unfortunately.

Serious question - how does DE curtail any of the adoption issues? With DE you're literally giving life to children who have biological families that they may find later in life, and who they may want to seek out. How will DE kids feel that their biological mother was paid a measly 10k or whatever to go through an egg retrieval? How will donors feel as they have their own kids, knowing that there are potential half siblings are out there which they are not aware of? Will the DE kids be mad at their parents if they end up with a biological disease that they weren't screened for? Or mad that they didn't pick a donor who was more athletic, attractive, etc? DE is going to honestly be more unethical than adoption in the next twenty years. How does spending 100k negotiate any of the adoption problems, and not just exasperate them?

For those using surrogate, you're asking a woman to risk her life to carry your child to term and financially reimbursing her. This is problematic for some.

I think the only "free and clear" DE situation is to have an open egg adoption within the family or a close friend and surrogate in the family or a close friend, where the donor is truly donating, not being reimbursed.

I am not judging anyone who has gone the DE route, as I believe REs are very predatory and all about making more money and not about finding medical solutions for infertility. I also understand the desperation of wanting your own child which is so easy for so many and the struggle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Just adopt” was an option 30 years ago. It’s NOT now. Do you know anyone who has pursued adoption lately? There are way, way more families interested in adopting than there are babies to adopt. In many cases, it’s basically not an option.

One friend of mine spoke to several adoption agencies in her area (not local) and was told that there are 25 families that have paid the fees, done the home visits, jumped through all the hoops, and are now approved for every one baby that is put up for adoption.

I have another friend, local, who was told she could only adopt if she was open to adopting a baby who had been exposed to drugs or alcohol prenatally. She did move forward, and was able to successfully adopt a baby from a mom with some drug use. So far, baby seems great and healthy, but obviously, there’s no telling what the future holds.

These are married, stable, high income, loving homes.

So yeah, if I had the money, I’d do it. It’s probably your only way to have a baby.

+1 there are basically no healthy newborns or even toddlers up for adoption. International adoptions have been severely curtailed. Then you have people who think that all adoptions are “trauma,” And I’m pretty sure in a few years’ time there will be some kind of unfortunate backlash against adopted kids/families because of it, sadly. Shelling out 100k+ on fertility treatments and/or even more $$$ on a surrogate is the only way. Unfortunately.

There are for the right price.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Just adopt” was an option 30 years ago. It’s NOT now. Do you know anyone who has pursued adoption lately? There are way, way more families interested in adopting than there are babies to adopt. In many cases, it’s basically not an option.

One friend of mine spoke to several adoption agencies in her area (not local) and was told that there are 25 families that have paid the fees, done the home visits, jumped through all the hoops, and are now approved for every one baby that is put up for adoption.

I have another friend, local, who was told she could only adopt if she was open to adopting a baby who had been exposed to drugs or alcohol prenatally. She did move forward, and was able to successfully adopt a baby from a mom with some drug use. So far, baby seems great and healthy, but obviously, there’s no telling what the future holds.

These are married, stable, high income, loving homes.

So yeah, if I had the money, I’d do it. It’s probably your only way to have a baby.

+1 there are basically no healthy newborns or even toddlers up for adoption. International adoptions have been severely curtailed. Then you have people who think that all adoptions are “trauma,” And I’m pretty sure in a few years’ time there will be some kind of unfortunate backlash against adopted kids/families because of it, sadly. Shelling out 100k+ on fertility treatments and/or even more $$$ on a surrogate is the only way. Unfortunately.

Serious question - how does DE curtail any of the adoption issues? With DE you're literally giving life to children who have biological families that they may find later in life, and who they may want to seek out. How will DE kids feel that their biological mother was paid a measly 10k or whatever to go through an egg retrieval? How will donors feel as they have their own kids, knowing that there are potential half siblings are out there which they are not aware of? Will the DE kids be mad at their parents if they end up with a biological disease that they weren't screened for? Or mad that they didn't pick a donor who was more athletic, attractive, etc? DE is going to honestly be more unethical than adoption in the next twenty years. How does spending 100k negotiate any of the adoption problems, and not just exasperate them?

For those using surrogate, you're asking a woman to risk her life to carry your child to term and financially reimbursing her. This is problematic for some.

I think the only "free and clear" DE situation is to have an open egg adoption within the family or a close friend and surrogate in the family or a close friend, where the donor is truly donating, not being reimbursed.

I am not judging anyone who has gone the DE route, as I believe REs are very predatory and all about making more money and not about finding medical solutions for infertility. I also understand the desperation of wanting your own child which is so easy for so many and the struggle.

Agreed 100% not once has an RE suggested solutions to my infertility issue, just IVF.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Just adopt” was an option 30 years ago. It’s NOT now. Do you know anyone who has pursued adoption lately? There are way, way more families interested in adopting than there are babies to adopt. In many cases, it’s basically not an option.

One friend of mine spoke to several adoption agencies in her area (not local) and was told that there are 25 families that have paid the fees, done the home visits, jumped through all the hoops, and are now approved for every one baby that is put up for adoption.

I have another friend, local, who was told she could only adopt if she was open to adopting a baby who had been exposed to drugs or alcohol prenatally. She did move forward, and was able to successfully adopt a baby from a mom with some drug use. So far, baby seems great and healthy, but obviously, there’s no telling what the future holds.

These are married, stable, high income, loving homes.

So yeah, if I had the money, I’d do it. It’s probably your only way to have a baby.

+1 there are basically no healthy newborns or even toddlers up for adoption. International adoptions have been severely curtailed. Then you have people who think that all adoptions are “trauma,” And I’m pretty sure in a few years’ time there will be some kind of unfortunate backlash against adopted kids/families because of it, sadly. Shelling out 100k+ on fertility treatments and/or even more $$$ on a surrogate is the only way. Unfortunately.

Serious question - how does DE curtail any of the adoption issues? With DE you're literally giving life to children who have biological families that they may find later in life, and who they may want to seek out. How will DE kids feel that their biological mother was paid a measly 10k or whatever to go through an egg retrieval? How will donors feel as they have their own kids, knowing that there are potential half siblings are out there which they are not aware of? Will the DE kids be mad at their parents if they end up with a biological disease that they weren't screened for? Or mad that they didn't pick a donor who was more athletic, attractive, etc? DE is going to honestly be more unethical than adoption in the next twenty years. How does spending 100k negotiate any of the adoption problems, and not just exasperate them?

For those using surrogate, you're asking a woman to risk her life to carry your child to term and financially reimbursing her. This is problematic for some.

I think the only "free and clear" DE situation is to have an open egg adoption within the family or a close friend and surrogate in the family or a close friend, where the donor is truly donating, not being reimbursed.

I am not judging anyone who has gone the DE route, as I believe REs are very predatory and all about making more money and not about finding medical solutions for infertility. I also understand the desperation of wanting your own child which is so easy for so many and the struggle.

I don't think anyone is saying there are not potential concerns with DE, but it does take away two of the concerns with adoption: (1) that the fetus was exposed to drugs or alcohol; and (2) knowing that your biological parents didn't want to raise you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Just adopt” was an option 30 years ago. It’s NOT now. Do you know anyone who has pursued adoption lately? There are way, way more families interested in adopting than there are babies to adopt. In many cases, it’s basically not an option.

One friend of mine spoke to several adoption agencies in her area (not local) and was told that there are 25 families that have paid the fees, done the home visits, jumped through all the hoops, and are now approved for every one baby that is put up for adoption.

I have another friend, local, who was told she could only adopt if she was open to adopting a baby who had been exposed to drugs or alcohol prenatally. She did move forward, and was able to successfully adopt a baby from a mom with some drug use. So far, baby seems great and healthy, but obviously, there’s no telling what the future holds.

These are married, stable, high income, loving homes.

So yeah, if I had the money, I’d do it. It’s probably your only way to have a baby.

+1 there are basically no healthy newborns or even toddlers up for adoption. International adoptions have been severely curtailed. Then you have people who think that all adoptions are “trauma,” And I’m pretty sure in a few years’ time there will be some kind of unfortunate backlash against adopted kids/families because of it, sadly. Shelling out 100k+ on fertility treatments and/or even more $$$ on a surrogate is the only way. Unfortunately.

Serious question - how does DE curtail any of the adoption issues? With DE you're literally giving life to children who have biological families that they may find later in life, and who they may want to seek out. How will DE kids feel that their biological mother was paid a measly 10k or whatever to go through an egg retrieval? How will donors feel as they have their own kids, knowing that there are potential half siblings are out there which they are not aware of? Will the DE kids be mad at their parents if they end up with a biological disease that they weren't screened for? Or mad that they didn't pick a donor who was more athletic, attractive, etc? DE is going to honestly be more unethical than adoption in the next twenty years. How does spending 100k negotiate any of the adoption problems, and not just exasperate them?

For those using surrogate, you're asking a woman to risk her life to carry your child to term and financially reimbursing her. This is problematic for some.

I think the only "free and clear" DE situation is to have an open egg adoption within the family or a close friend and surrogate in the family or a close friend, where the donor is truly donating, not being reimbursed.

I am not judging anyone who has gone the DE route, as I believe REs are very predatory and all about making more money and not about finding medical solutions for infertility. I also understand the desperation of wanting your own child which is so easy for so many and the struggle.

I don't think anyone is saying there are not potential concerns with DE, but it does take away two of the concerns with adoption: (1) that the fetus was exposed to drugs or alcohol; and (2) knowing that your biological parents didn't want to raise you.

Is #2 really valid in the DE scenario? More like your biological mother was willing to sell her dna so that you could exist for complete strangers she didn't get to vet, which is the case for adoptions in the US.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, I believe human trafficking should be illegal. Including when gay men do it.

How is this human trafficking?

What else is buying a human being?

Are you a Marxist? This is paying someone for their physical labor. Or are you against all forms of IVF, which is buying a human being?

You're paying to use a woman's body, usually a woman who is desperate for money. As feminist, yes, I'm against that - it's no different from paying a prostitute. Do what you want, but don't pretend you're on the right side of history.