Italy, France, Germany, and Spain outlaw surrogacy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s a law that de facto makes it impossible for gay couples to have children. It’s not progressive. In Italy it was advanced by the far right government.

It doesn't prevent them from adopting. You can be a parent.

Gay couples cannot adopt in Italy.

[Anonymous]

Europe is always way ahead of the United States in terms of human rights. Surrogacy in the U.S. is just like organ donation which is common in the developing world. Surrogacy benefits the wealthy while exploiting poor people, similar to poor folks selling their kidneys and other organs in South Asia.

[Anonymous]

https://msutoday.msu.edu/news/2012/growing-market-for-human-organs-exploits-poor#:~:text=%E2%80%9CThis%2520is%2520a%2520serious%2520form,Humanities%2520in%2520the%2520Life%2520Sciences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Surrogacy is not benign and is not the answer for infertility.

Correct, no one who has other options just "does" surrogacy. It's a very specific type of female infertility where pregnancies can't be carried to term.

Want to reduce that need / number? Great, ACOG needs to formally recognize the field of reproductive immunology.

Wow you’re naive.

I'm not, I'm one of those women with that kind of infertility so I know a lot about it. 99.9% of women with this kind of infertility don't have 150K for a surrogate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s a law that de facto makes it impossible for gay couples to have children. It’s not progressive. In Italy it was advanced by the far right government.

It doesn't prevent them from adopting. You can be a parent.

Only couples who have been married for 3 (or 4?) years can adopt. Gay marriage is illegal in Italy. Therefore, they cannot be parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62rmv63069o

At the bottom of this article it mentions that “all forms of surrogacy” are banned in Italy, France, Germany, and Spain. This really surprises me that Western European countries, that are typically rather progressive, at least compared to the U.S. would have this type of policy.

Did you know that they also ban abortion in the third trimester?

Third trimester is week 28-40. That’s late and very rare.

So?

3rd trimester elective termination is still 100% lawful in D.C., New Jersey, and several other U.S. states, but is BANNED by these supposedly “progressive” EU countries.

Those EU countries have government funded abortion.

But they restrict elective abortions much earlier. Even Finland has a 12 week limit.

Still much more reasonable than certain US states which ban it completely.

It's also hard to compare to the US because bothe the healthcare and political environments are so different. The definition of "elective abortion" is narrower there and has no impact on a woman's ability to access a medically necessary abortion (or simply healthcare that will make a naturally occurring miscarriage safer), plus healthcare us easier for poor people to access. So the abortion restrictions there can be more narrowly about the ethical/philosophical choice to terminate a healthy pregnancy. As in the US there are people who believe a woman should always retain this right even into the final trimester but more people believe that at some point the fetus gains some relief guts of personhood. So several countries do limit late term elective abortion.

But in the US the anti-abortion lobby is so severe and refuses any compromise. So we are forced to argue over stuff like whether a 13 yo raise victim should be forced to carry a pregnancy to term or whether a woman who needs an abortion to avoid risk of death should have to get permission from her spouse or the state. In the EU these questions are more settled with sanity prevailing. But US politics and healthcare force us to keep litigating them.

It's a very different landscape.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62rmv63069o

At the bottom of this article it mentions that “all forms of surrogacy” are banned in Italy, France, Germany, and Spain. This really surprises me that Western European countries, that are typically rather progressive, at least compared to the U.S. would have this type of policy.

Good. It should be outlawed in the US as well. There is nothing progressive about wealthy women using poor women to have their babies because they don't want to lose their figured it they don't want to interrupt their careers. Surrogacy is despicable.

Surrogacy is amazing. If a woman chooses to do this in the US, she should be allowed to make the choice. It’s despicable to take this away.

I will believe you next time a rich billionaire woman chooses to be a surrogate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62rmv63069o

At the bottom of this article it mentions that “all forms of surrogacy” are banned in Italy, France, Germany, and Spain. This really surprises me that Western European countries, that are typically rather progressive, at least compared to the U.S. would have this type of policy.

I would disagree that those countries are progressive compared to the US. They are merely socialist.

This hurts couples with infertility, not just same sex couples. I know a woman who was a surrogate several times. The idea of her being exploited makes me laugh.

I'm not laughing about how much my two babies wrecked my body. Pregnancy is one of the riskiest things woa woman can do. Several times?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62rmv63069o

At the bottom of this article it mentions that “all forms of surrogacy” are banned in Italy, France, Germany, and Spain. This really surprises me that Western European countries, that are typically rather progressive, at least compared to the U.S. would have this type of policy.

Good. It should be outlawed in the US as well. There is nothing progressive about wealthy women using poor women to have their babies because they don't want to lose their figured it they don't want to interrupt their careers. Surrogacy is despicable.

Surrogacy is amazing. If a woman chooses to do this in the US, she should be allowed to make the choice. It’s despicable to take this away.

I will believe you next time a rich billionaire woman chooses to be a surrogate.

I have a friend who was a surrogate and she’s not poor. She’s middle class. She was a surrogate for a gay couple and then for a couple where the woman couldn’t carry a baby.

I also have two friends who could onl have children via surrogacy and neither were rich.

If you can’t have your own children, for whatever reason, the path is extremely difficult and expensive. If women are willing to be surrogates and are compensated, more power to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Europe is always way ahead of the United States in terms of human rights. Surrogacy in the U.S. is just like organ donation which is common in the developing world. Surrogacy benefits the wealthy while exploiting poor people, similar to poor folks selling their kidneys and other organs in South Asia.

They do not sell their kidneys. They are trafficked and their kidneys are harvested. Usually for Americans who can pay for the organs.

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=4224506

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62rmv63069o

At the bottom of this article it mentions that “all forms of surrogacy” are banned in Italy, France, Germany, and Spain. This really surprises me that Western European countries, that are typically rather progressive, at least compared to the U.S. would have this type of policy.

I would disagree that those countries are progressive compared to the US. They are merely socialist.

This hurts couples with infertility, not just same sex couples. I know a woman who was a surrogate several times. The idea of her being exploited makes me laugh.

I'm not laughing about how much my two babies wrecked my body. Pregnancy is one of the riskiest things woa woman can do. Several times?

Yes, women can have multiple children without it wrecking their bodies. Maybe you couldn’t but everyone is different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Europe is stronger on human rights and this practice is exploitative. This law is preventing people from renting the bodies of poor women in third world countries.

+1 banning surrogacy is the right thing to do. Honestly, I’m amazed that the US allows it. But in this country it’s true that making money is more important than protecting human rights, particularly a woman.

Why? The women who carry these babies to term are providing an incredibly valuable service to couples who otherwise wouldn’t be able to have children. If the surrogate is an adult who willingly agreed and was paid the amount that was agreed upon, then how is she being exploited?

Money is the reason they agree. Poor women. Have you ever heard of a woman with a high salary job or who is married to a high earning husband agree to get a surrogate? No. Because it is only poor women and, frankly, surrogacy is another form of prostitution.

If a woman is infertile then use IVF or adopt. But these women want white babies even though there are plenty of minority children who need a loving home. I guess they can only love white babies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62rmv63069o

At the bottom of this article it mentions that “all forms of surrogacy” are banned in Italy, France, Germany, and Spain. This really surprises me that Western European countries, that are typically rather progressive, at least compared to the U.S. would have this type of policy.

Good. It should be outlawed in the US as well. There is nothing progressive about wealthy women using poor women to have their babies because they don't want to lose their figured it they don't want to interrupt their careers. Surrogacy is despicable.

Surrogacy is amazing. If a woman chooses to do this in the US, she should be allowed to make the choice. It’s despicable to take this away.

I will believe you next time a rich billionaire woman chooses to be a surrogate.

I hope the next thing the GOP does is mahe surrogacy illegal and punishable to both surrogate and person seeking surrogacy anywhere in the world.

I have a friend who was a surrogate and she’s not poor. She’s middle class. She was a surrogate for a gay couple and then for a couple where the woman couldn’t carry a baby.

I also have two friends who could onl have children via surrogacy and neither were rich.

If you can’t have your own children, for whatever reason, the path is extremely difficult and expensive. If women are willing to be surrogates and are compensated, more power to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Surrogacy is not benign and is not the answer for infertility.

Correct, no one who has other options just "does" surrogacy. It's a very specific type of female infertility where pregnancies can't be carried to term.

Want to reduce that need / number? Great, ACOG needs to formally recognize the field of reproductive immunology.

Wow you’re naive.

I'm not, I'm one of those women with that kind of infertility so I know a lot about it. 99.9% of women with this kind of infertility don't have 150K for a surrogate.

No surrogate is a oId $150,000. Medical and basic expenses are all that is legally allowed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62rmv63069o

At the bottom of this article it mentions that “all forms of surrogacy” are banned in Italy, France, Germany, and Spain. This really surprises me that Western European countries, that are typically rather progressive, at least compared to the U.S. would have this type of policy.

Good. It should be outlawed in the US as well. There is nothing progressive about wealthy women using poor women to have their babies because they don't want to lose their figured it they don't want to interrupt their careers. Surrogacy is despicable.

Surrogacy is amazing. If a woman chooses to do this in the US, she should be allowed to make the choice. It’s despicable to take this away.

I will believe you next time a rich billionaire woman chooses to be a surrogate.

I have a friend who was a surrogate and she’s not poor. She’s middle class. She was a surrogate for a gay couple and then for a couple where the woman couldn’t carry a baby.

I also have two friends who could onl have children via surrogacy and neither were rich.

If you can’t have your own children, for whatever reason, the path is extremely difficult and expensive. If women are willing to be surrogates and are compensated, more power to them.

The surrogate I know (acquaintance from HS) is also solidly middle class, maybe bumping up against UMC. She had 4 of her own kids young, easy pregnancies, and loved being pregnant. She was a surrogate twice for an infertile couple. She is also very religious and viewed it as a very "easy" thing she could do to help God build families.