An insane surrogacy story

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What did the rich person do?

I’m not going to read a long article. Usually these things can be summarized in a few sentences.

Everything possible to try to wreck the life of the surrogate who experienced still birth while hospitalized. Suing her, cutting off payments, leaving surrogate on the hook for hospital bills (including weeks of inpatient monitoring). Bi wants her to go to jail, lose her own son, etc.

Also mentions that placental problems are due to the dna of the embryo and this isn’t routinely disclosed to the GC. Gestational diabetes, placenta previa, abruption, etc.

Bi also said her next GC was perfect, despite the fact that her GC experienced severe bleeding necessitating an emergency hysterectomy and ICU admission with intubation.

Alternative version: GC lied to IPs about her living situation and concealed material information from them throughout pregnancy, including a placental abruption. She then made a series of poor decisions that killed the fetus.

I don't agree that being a surrogate should give external parties control over your sex life, when you seek medical care, and full access to any information those people want to know about you. I can't comment on her actual contract but I don't think she acted in bad faith and I believe she did what she could to ensure the baby's survival.

It's a mistake to sue a surrogate for a stillbirth. There is no legal punishment or monetary compensation that will offset the loss of the baby. If someone tries to help you and it goes wrong, or does a job for you that's only 95% done right, suing them is basically just revenge when there's no chance of actually resolving the original problem. Nothing will bring the baby back.

The surrogate agreed to relinquish control over those things in exchange for money. She then failed to abide by the terms of the agreement. It’s a breach of contract like any other.

There's literally NO proof that she was having any sex with anyone and even if she was, no proof that the sex had anything to do with the stillbirth. I've literally never heard of having sex leading to a stillbirth, you weirdo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This person has to be toxic on other ways, no? I'd be interested to know...maybe people are too scared to talk about it.

The article mentioned that she is on her SIXTH nanny. The baby girl was born in 2024.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What did the rich person do?

I’m not going to read a long article. Usually these things can be summarized in a few sentences.

Everything possible to try to wreck the life of the surrogate who experienced still birth while hospitalized. Suing her, cutting off payments, leaving surrogate on the hook for hospital bills (including weeks of inpatient monitoring). Bi wants her to go to jail, lose her own son, etc.

Also mentions that placental problems are due to the dna of the embryo and this isn’t routinely disclosed to the GC. Gestational diabetes, placenta previa, abruption, etc.

Bi also said her next GC was perfect, despite the fact that her GC experienced severe bleeding necessitating an emergency hysterectomy and ICU admission with intubation.

Alternative version: GC lied to IPs about her living situation and concealed material information from them throughout pregnancy, including a placental abruption. She then made a series of poor decisions that killed the fetus.

The evidence at hand — which seems to be substantial and is detailed in the article — does not support this whatsoever.

Read the complaint that the IPs filed. It tells a very different story.

Complaints are meaningless. Crazy people can allege anything in a complaint and often do. It is nothing approaching actual evidence.

The Wired article meticulously picks through the evidence. Nothing supports the idea that the IP was anything other than fully in the wrong. The court losses and lawyers that have walked away are also significant indicators of the weaknesses of the IP’s claims.

IP is represented by a partner at BakerHostetler. This isn’t some silly ambulance chasing lawsuit.

No she is not. She's represented by Doug Rochen, a plaintiff's lawyer who took the case on a contingency fee. And I will guarantee you that the case will never go anywhere because in order for it to go anywhere Rochen knows that he needs the surrogate dropped as a defendant so that he can call her as a witness so that he can effectively go after the hospital - because that's where the money is. And Bi is never going to agree to that.

Why would he take a case on contingency if he knows he has no way of winning?

Probably the same reason that her first lawyer let her run up hundreds of thousands in legal fees that they now aren't able to collect on - on paper Bi presents very well, and it's a good bet that she presents well in person too, at least at first. And it's a case that pulls at the heartstrings And just because he takes the case doesn't mean he keeps the case. Lawyers seem to be flavor of the month for her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What did the rich person do?

I’m not going to read a long article. Usually these things can be summarized in a few sentences.

Everything possible to try to wreck the life of the surrogate who experienced still birth while hospitalized. Suing her, cutting off payments, leaving surrogate on the hook for hospital bills (including weeks of inpatient monitoring). Bi wants her to go to jail, lose her own son, etc.

Also mentions that placental problems are due to the dna of the embryo and this isn’t routinely disclosed to the GC. Gestational diabetes, placenta previa, abruption, etc.

Bi also said her next GC was perfect, despite the fact that her GC experienced severe bleeding necessitating an emergency hysterectomy and ICU admission with intubation.

Alternative version: GC lied to IPs about her living situation and concealed material information from them throughout pregnancy, including a placental abruption. She then made a series of poor decisions that killed the fetus.

The evidence at hand — which seems to be substantial and is detailed in the article — does not support this whatsoever.

Read the complaint that the IPs filed. It tells a very different story.

Complaints are meaningless. Crazy people can allege anything in a complaint and often do. It is nothing approaching actual evidence.

The Wired article meticulously picks through the evidence. Nothing supports the idea that the IP was anything other than fully in the wrong. The court losses and lawyers that have walked away are also significant indicators of the weaknesses of the IP’s claims.

IP is represented by a partner at BakerHostetler. This isn’t some silly ambulance chasing lawsuit.

I was involved in defending a lawsuit where that particular law firm represented the plaintiff. The lawyers were terrible and the plaintiff was worse. Just because it’s a fancy law firm doesn’t mean it’s a good case. Those guys have lake houses and tuition bills and country club memberships everything else to pay and a client who will put cash on the barrel head may be attractive, especially if you’re a crap partner who isn’t pulling in real work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What did the rich person do?

I’m not going to read a long article. Usually these things can be summarized in a few sentences.

Everything possible to try to wreck the life of the surrogate who experienced still birth while hospitalized. Suing her, cutting off payments, leaving surrogate on the hook for hospital bills (including weeks of inpatient monitoring). Bi wants her to go to jail, lose her own son, etc.

Also mentions that placental problems are due to the dna of the embryo and this isn’t routinely disclosed to the GC. Gestational diabetes, placenta previa, abruption, etc.

Bi also said her next GC was perfect, despite the fact that her GC experienced severe bleeding necessitating an emergency hysterectomy and ICU admission with intubation.

Alternative version: GC lied to IPs about her living situation and concealed material information from them throughout pregnancy, including a placental abruption. She then made a series of poor decisions that killed the fetus.

I don't agree that being a surrogate should give external parties control over your sex life, when you seek medical care, and full access to any information those people want to know about you. I can't comment on her actual contract but I don't think she acted in bad faith and I believe she did what she could to ensure the baby's survival.

It's a mistake to sue a surrogate for a stillbirth. There is no legal punishment or monetary compensation that will offset the loss of the baby. If someone tries to help you and it goes wrong, or does a job for you that's only 95% done right, suing them is basically just revenge when there's no chance of actually resolving the original problem. Nothing will bring the baby back.

The surrogate agreed to relinquish control over those things in exchange for money. She then failed to abide by the terms of the agreement. It’s a breach of contract like any other.

There's literally NO proof that she was having any sex with anyone and even if she was, no proof that the sex had anything to do with the stillbirth. I've literally never heard of having sex leading to a stillbirth, you weirdo.

If she had a placenta problem like previa they usually advise no sex as that can result in a placental tear which can absolutely lead to still birth. But you’d have to be crazy to risk that if you were advised to avoid that, because odds are good you’d bleed out right along with the baby.

I had placenta previa with bed rest and also had birth trauma with another pregnancy. I’m a lawyer so I’ve always wondered how surrogacy contracts allocate the cost of these risks including health risks anc risks of mortality to the surrogate. Incidentally, I recall my specialist st Georgetown saying that placenta previa is more common with IvF -/ j think I was the only one on the wing with that who wasn’t an IVF mom or one with multiple previous c sections. It makes some sense because previa is essentially an implantation problem.

As a long time lawyer, my general observation is that more people are crazy than you’d otherwise think. And most litigants are crazy — lawsuits are a terrible way to resolve anything so a sane person will take almost any other viable option. I’m sure her lawyers are waiting to get a chunk of change from hospital insurer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This person has to be toxic on other ways, no? I'd be interested to know...maybe people are too scared to talk about it.

The article mentioned that she is on her SIXTH nanny. The baby girl was born in 2024.

And her 9th lawyer representing her in this case. And she hasn’t paid one lawyer upwards of 200k. And her second surrogate had to have a hysterectomy after bearing the child yet the intended parent called the experience “perfect.”

[Anonymous]

I hope the poor surrogate is eventually compensated for this horror show. And I hope prospective surrogates in the future google this couple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, anyone who is considering being a surrogate should read this article. The fact that Bi contacted psychics then used their "visions" to harass the woman is beyond insane.

And contacted her son directly, sending him a picture of the dead infant. I mean, wtf? This woman is a raging insane narcissist.

+1. The son is 7 yo and the crazy woman sent a picture of the stillborn kid his mother carried for her to him. These surrogacy agency didn’t vet the rich crazy intended mom well (she’s bipolar and couldn’t carry a kid because of the meds) and the mom.

That is the scariest part of the article. Isn’t harassing a minor against some law? Cindy Bi should be worried that CPS doesn’t show up on her doorstep because she’s bat sh** crazy and people will worry she might not be up to taking care of her kid

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, this Cindy Bi lady is INSANE!! I almost posted this in the infertility forum, but I just knew they'd all be on her side.

I don’t think that is fair to the residents of that forum, and I say that as someone who thinks commercial surrogacy should be banned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What did the rich person do?

I’m not going to read a long article. Usually these things can be summarized in a few sentences.

Everything possible to try to wreck the life of the surrogate who experienced still birth while hospitalized. Suing her, cutting off payments, leaving surrogate on the hook for hospital bills (including weeks of inpatient monitoring). Bi wants her to go to jail, lose her own son, etc.

Also mentions that placental problems are due to the dna of the embryo and this isn’t routinely disclosed to the GC. Gestational diabetes, placenta previa, abruption, etc.

Bi also said her next GC was perfect, despite the fact that her GC experienced severe bleeding necessitating an emergency hysterectomy and ICU admission with intubation.

Alternative version: GC lied to IPs about her living situation and concealed material information from them throughout pregnancy, including a placental abruption. She then made a series of poor decisions that killed the fetus.

The evidence at hand — which seems to be substantial and is detailed in the article — does not support this whatsoever.

Read the complaint that the IPs filed. It tells a very different story.

Complaints are meaningless. Crazy people can allege anything in a complaint and often do. It is nothing approaching actual evidence.

The Wired article meticulously picks through the evidence. Nothing supports the idea that the IP was anything other than fully in the wrong. The court losses and lawyers that have walked away are also significant indicators of the weaknesses of the IP’s claims.

IP is represented by a partner at BakerHostetler. This isn’t some silly ambulance chasing lawsuit.

I was involved in defending a lawsuit where that particular law firm represented the plaintiff. The lawyers were terrible and the plaintiff was worse. Just because it’s a fancy law firm doesn’t mean it’s a good case. Those guys have lake houses and tuition bills and country club memberships everything else to pay and a client who will put cash on the barrel head may be attractive, especially if you’re a crap partner who isn’t pulling in real work.

I don’t think she’s being represented by BakerHostetler. It’s some ambulance chaser on contingency.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What did the rich person do?

I’m not going to read a long article. Usually these things can be summarized in a few sentences.

Everything possible to try to wreck the life of the surrogate who experienced still birth while hospitalized. Suing her, cutting off payments, leaving surrogate on the hook for hospital bills (including weeks of inpatient monitoring). Bi wants her to go to jail, lose her own son, etc.

Also mentions that placental problems are due to the dna of the embryo and this isn’t routinely disclosed to the GC. Gestational diabetes, placenta previa, abruption, etc.

Bi also said her next GC was perfect, despite the fact that her GC experienced severe bleeding necessitating an emergency hysterectomy and ICU admission with intubation.

Alternative version: GC lied to IPs about her living situation and concealed material information from them throughout pregnancy, including a placental abruption. She then made a series of poor decisions that killed the fetus.

The evidence at hand — which seems to be substantial and is detailed in the article — does not support this whatsoever.

Read the complaint that the IPs filed. It tells a very different story.

Complaints are meaningless. Crazy people can allege anything in a complaint and often do. It is nothing approaching actual evidence.

The Wired article meticulously picks through the evidence. Nothing supports the idea that the IP was anything other than fully in the wrong. The court losses and lawyers that have walked away are also significant indicators of the weaknesses of the IP’s claims.

IP is represented by a partner at BakerHostetler. This isn’t some silly ambulance chasing lawsuit.

No she is not. She's represented by Doug Rochen, a plaintiff's lawyer who took the case on a contingency fee. And I will guarantee you that the case will never go anywhere because in order for it to go anywhere Rochen knows that he needs the surrogate dropped as a defendant so that he can call her as a witness so that he can effectively go after the hospital - because that's where the money is. And Bi is never going to agree to that.

Why would he take a case on contingency if he knows he has no way of winning?

Because it doesn’t matter if he wins or loses. He has already gotten value out of the case just with this paragraph alone from the Wired article:

Just when it seemed like Bi might not be able to stomach, or afford, more lawsuits, she found someone who would represent her without charging hourly. “Pitbull attorney” Doug Rochen has the kind, open face of a Midwestern pastor. He’s gotten eight-figure payouts for abused foster children and mistreated prisoners and specializes in sexual abuse cases. Bi says Rochen will sue the doctors and the hospital for malpractice and pursue arbitration against Rebecca Smith, SAI, and other parties in exchange for 40 percent of Bi’s winnings.

His name will be known, no matter the outcome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No, I don’t think she agreed do relinquish control of her sex life. Nor whether her 1st grader could sleep in her bed, etc.

I have rarely read something that so strongly screams severe personality disorder (I know the article mentions bipolar, but what I read is not explained by bipolar. )

Probably borderline pd instead of bipolar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I hope the poor surrogate is eventually compensated for this horror show. And I hope prospective surrogates in the future google this couple.

+1 I would contribute to a gofundme so she can sue the intended parent for harassment and to get her medical expenses reimbursed. I would imagine that this Wired article will tank Cindy Bi's VC career too. Although if she says she's "cash poor," I doubt she was that rich to begin with.

[Anonymous]

The surrogate agency should have taken some action against the crazy intended parent the moment she started to post private information about the surrogate mother's health and job in chat groups. That is 100% not ok and violated their agreement.

That should have been an indication that the surrogate mom was not respectful of the surrogate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The surrogate agency should have taken some action against the crazy intended parent the moment she started to post private information about the surrogate mother's health and job in chat groups. That is 100% not ok and violated their agreement.

That should have been an indication that the surrogate mom was not respectful of the surrogate.

Since when do surrogacy agencies care anything about surrogates? Of course they don’t care that the intended parent is violating the agreement. The agencies work for one side only, and it’s not the surrogate.