Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you don’t have any medical reason to do so. I just don’t want to be pregnant again, gain weight and have to try to lose it again. have my body change permanently, give birth etc.

And I can easily afford a surrogate.

Would you do it in my situation?

Is it ethical to buy sperm and eggs? I feel like buying the use of a uterus is more ethical than buying someone's genetic material. The surrogate has no genetic connection to the baby, but an egg or sperm donor DOES.

The only reason I wouldn't hire a surrogate is that you can't really control what she does while pregnant. I was a super vigilant while pregnant. There is no way you can control what a surrogate does, who they sleep with, what they ingest, or expose themselves to.

So what stops you is that you can't control your employee close enough. But yeah tell me again this is not ethically questionable and about power and money imbalances.

Ok, circle back. I’m happy to talk “business”.
Buying someone’s genetic material vs. renting out a uterus. Power? Money? Not the issue here. You are altering the very direction of the human species when eggs and sperm are commodities.

Veterinarian lady you are crazy misogynist. There was no need to bring up the value of the animal going through treatment other than to imply that women who undergo fertility treatment are inferior.

I can’t believe you’re saying with a straight face that daily sex work has no harm quotient. I think sex work should be legal but there is a lot of data that sex work is not good for women. And while pregnancy can be dangerous (I almost died twice and that was after puking my guts up for 9 months and crippling SPD pain), the idea that you could say with a straight face that pregnancy is objectively more harmful than a life of sex work is patently ludicrous.

I am also very confused by why you keep bringing up India. Op did not say she was going to hire someone from India and underpay them (this would actually be very unwise when factoring in some tricky US immigration issues) and abuse them. You have inserted “surrogates are abused in India” as some random straw man that is entirely different from the conversation we’re having. No one is saying surrogates can’t be abused in countries where there are not rules and regulations to protect them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.thesurrogacyexperience.com/medical-procedures.html

This article explains that the gestational surrogate does a whole IVF cycle minus the egg retrieval.

If you don't know the basic procedure then maybe you shouldn't comment that it's the same as any other work.

NP. Umm minus the egg retrieval (and hormone injections to hyperovulate is a big deal. Just me I’ve done both. Also there are lots of options for natural cycle transfers involving minimal hormones. So maybe you don’t know as much as you think.

Did you read the article??? They absolutely get FSH and progesterone injections plus transvaginal ultrasounds no matter what.

This is not how IVF works. I’ve done 4 transfer cycles. None have involved FSH and only one involved progesterone injections. Please see yourself out on this subject. I’m sure what you are saying is accurate in the bet world but not in human IVF.

Read the article. It describes lots of injectable for the recipient.

Just stop. You are talking to people who have done multiple IVF cycles, and your super-accurate website you just googled for ten seconds ago is not giving you the whole picture. That is one protocol out of many.

Some of your arguments on this thread are stronger than others, but this one is really showing your depth of critical thinking.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you don’t have any medical reason to do so. I just don’t want to be pregnant again, gain weight and have to try to lose it again. have my body change permanently, give birth etc.

And I can easily afford a surrogate.

Would you do it in my situation?

Is it ethical to buy sperm and eggs? I feel like buying the use of a uterus is more ethical than buying someone's genetic material. The surrogate has no genetic connection to the baby, but an egg or sperm donor DOES.

The only reason I wouldn't hire a surrogate is that you can't really control what she does while pregnant. I was a super vigilant while pregnant. There is no way you can control what a surrogate does, who they sleep with, what they ingest, or expose themselves to.

So what stops you is that you can't control your employee close enough. But yeah tell me again this is not ethically questionable and about power and money imbalances.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.thesurrogacyexperience.com/medical-procedures.html

This article explains that the gestational surrogate does a whole IVF cycle minus the egg retrieval.

If you don't know the basic procedure then maybe you shouldn't comment that it's the same as any other work.

NP. Umm minus the egg retrieval (and hormone injections to hyperovulate is a big deal. Just me I’ve done both. Also there are lots of options for natural cycle transfers involving minimal hormones. So maybe you don’t know as much as you think.

Did you read the article??? They absolutely get FSH and progesterone injections plus transvaginal ultrasounds no matter what.

This is not how IVF works. I’ve done 4 transfer cycles. None have involved FSH and only one involved progesterone injections. Please see yourself out on this subject. I’m sure what you are saying is accurate in the bet world but not in human IVF.

Read the article. It describes lots of injectable for the recipient.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.thesurrogacyexperience.com/medical-procedures.html

This article explains that the gestational surrogate does a whole IVF cycle minus the egg retrieval.

If you don't know the basic procedure then maybe you shouldn't comment that it's the same as any other work.

NP. Umm minus the egg retrieval (and hormone injections to hyperovulate is a big deal. Just me I’ve done both. Also there are lots of options for natural cycle transfers involving minimal hormones. So maybe you don’t know as much as you think.

Did you read the article??? They absolutely get FSH and progesterone injections plus transvaginal ultrasounds no matter what.

This is not how IVF works. I’ve done 4 transfer cycles. None have involved FSH and only one involved progesterone injections. Please see yourself out on this subject. I’m sure what you are saying is accurate in the bet world but not in human IVF.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All you ladies claiming you would be surrogates-- you do know you have to basically have IVF, right? Many, many shots in your muscle and transvaginal ultrasounds.

I'm a veterinarian and we do this in cows and horses. It's called Embryo Transfer. The "genetically superior" female is super ovulated and many embryos are created. Then the animals that aren't as valuable are hormonally manipulated to accept the embryos of the female that is more highly valued.

See how I find it ethically gross to do to people? It sets up a system where certain people are more worthy b.c they have money, and that gives them the right to use another woman's body.

I know you will start yelling about people having free will- though there is lots of evidence of trafficking and coercion in the industry. A desperately poor person can easily be forced into being a gestational carrier.

You are assuming the surrogate is also an egg donor which is an enormous leap. But so I guess now you are saying that women who go through fertility treatments are less valuable and that it is ethically gross to help infertile women have children? And you are the person supposedly looking out for the little guy here?

When these things are legal, there are protections in place to prevent the abuse of the system. When they are illegal, desperately poor people are more frequently coerced into these types of trafficking situations. Equating a normal gestational surrogate who is generally paid handsomely for a job they are willing to do to victims of human trafficking is an EGREGIOUS insult to victims of human trafficking. Jesus, like seriously.

These are consenting adults, entering into a transactional relationship surrounding a job one party is willing to do and that another party is willing to pay for.

Are you tired from all the leaps you are making? You are wearing me TF out for sure. The procedure in farm animals is called EMBRYO TRANSFER. It's completely analogous to surrogacy in which the recipient has no genetic relation to the embryo. Do try to keep up, dear.

So there's no exploitation of women in India for surrogacy. It's legal there so therefore everything's above board. Right?

LOL what??? This response doesn’t even make enough sense to respond to.

You said embryo transfer in animals was equivalent to the surrogate being an egg donor then went off about infertility. It is not - as I said it's exactly equivalent to the surrogate having no genetic connection to the baby.

You said if it is legal then people won't be exploited. I stated that it is legal in India and there is PLENTY of evidence of coercion, trafficking and exploitation.

Exactly. This is the ultimate exploitation of women. Shame on those who believe it’s ok to exploit poor women.

Are you there any other jobs that you believe that only rich people should be able to choose to take?

Way to completely deny non- wealthy women their agency and ability to make choices about their own body.

Pardon?

I see now that we are definitely on the way to Handmaid's Tale territory in this country.

Anonymous wrote:I’m one of the people who said that if circumstances were different I would be a surrogate.

I have done seven cycles of IVF. I’m not incredibly fertile, which is why I have to say “if circumstances were different”. I know exactly what it entails. I also know that the worst part of IVF by far is the superovulation and retrieval, not the preparation for transfer. I did quite a few frozen cycles, which is analogous to what a surrogate would experience, and they were absolutely nothing compared to the ovulation and retrieval cycles. Many protocols don’t even require multiple injections, just oral medication and then oral or vaginal suppositories. They are a walk in the park.

The person who compares it to a veterinary transfer and says that the receiving party is a “less valuable animal” is frankly nuts. Come back to me when the gestational animal has freely entered into a contract that involves appropriate compensation.

Truly one of the stupider analogies out there.

Again- economic exploitation occurs with surrogacy. Does a desperately poor woman have the same choices a rich one does? Again, look at India. Free will doesn't apply there for the most part in terms of surrogacy. If your choices are limited-- are things truly entered in to freely?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.thesurrogacyexperience.com/medical-procedures.html

This article explains that the gestational surrogate does a whole IVF cycle minus the egg retrieval.

If you don't know the basic procedure then maybe you shouldn't comment that it's the same as any other work.

NP. Umm minus the egg retrieval (and hormone injections to hyperovulate is a big deal. Just me I’ve done both. Also there are lots of options for natural cycle transfers involving minimal hormones. So maybe you don’t know as much as you think.

I’m the one who said I would do it and that I know someone who has done it. I’m also not straight so my pregnancies involved a lot of this stuff too. Transvaginal ultrasounds definitely suck but not so much I wouldn’t be willing to do it for someone. To be clear: I think there is the possibility for surrogacy to be exploitative and I am more comfortable with it as a solely unpaid endeavour but I don’t find it inherently unethical as some of you seem to.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.thesurrogacyexperience.com/medical-procedures.html

This article explains that the gestational surrogate does a whole IVF cycle minus the egg retrieval.

If you don't know the basic procedure then maybe you shouldn't comment that it's the same as any other work.

NP. Umm minus the egg retrieval (and hormone injections to hyperovulate is a big deal. Just me I’ve done both. Also there are lots of options for natural cycle transfers involving minimal hormones. So maybe you don’t know as much as you think.

Did you read the article??? They absolutely get FSH and progesterone injections plus transvaginal ultrasounds no matter what.

This is false. Protocols vary widely. .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All you ladies claiming you would be surrogates-- you do know you have to basically have IVF, right? Many, many shots in your muscle and transvaginal ultrasounds.

I'm a veterinarian and we do this in cows and horses. It's called Embryo Transfer. The "genetically superior" female is super ovulated and many embryos are created. Then the animals that aren't as valuable are hormonally manipulated to accept the embryos of the female that is more highly valued.

See how I find it ethically gross to do to people? It sets up a system where certain people are more worthy b.c they have money, and that gives them the right to use another woman's body.

I know you will start yelling about people having free will- though there is lots of evidence of trafficking and coercion in the industry. A desperately poor person can easily be forced into being a gestational carrier.

You are assuming the surrogate is also an egg donor which is an enormous leap. But so I guess now you are saying that women who go through fertility treatments are less valuable and that it is ethically gross to help infertile women have children? And you are the person supposedly looking out for the little guy here?

When these things are legal, there are protections in place to prevent the abuse of the system. When they are illegal, desperately poor people are more frequently coerced into these types of trafficking situations. Equating a normal gestational surrogate who is generally paid handsomely for a job they are willing to do to victims of human trafficking is an EGREGIOUS insult to victims of human trafficking. Jesus, like seriously.

These are consenting adults, entering into a transactional relationship surrounding a job one party is willing to do and that another party is willing to pay for.

Are you tired from all the leaps you are making? You are wearing me TF out for sure. The procedure in farm animals is called EMBRYO TRANSFER. It's completely analogous to surrogacy in which the recipient has no genetic relation to the embryo. Do try to keep up, dear.

So there's no exploitation of women in India for surrogacy. It's legal there so therefore everything's above board. Right?

LOL what??? This response doesn’t even make enough sense to respond to.

You said embryo transfer in animals was equivalent to the surrogate being an egg donor then went off about infertility. It is not - as I said it's exactly equivalent to the surrogate having no genetic connection to the baby.

You said if it is legal then people won't be exploited. I stated that it is legal in India and there is PLENTY of evidence of coercion, trafficking and exploitation.

Exactly. This is the ultimate exploitation of women. Shame on those who believe it’s ok to exploit poor women.

Are you there any other jobs that you believe that only rich people should be able to choose to take?

Way to completely deny non- wealthy women their agency and ability to make choices about their own body.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.thesurrogacyexperience.com/medical-procedures.html

This article explains that the gestational surrogate does a whole IVF cycle minus the egg retrieval.

If you don't know the basic procedure then maybe you shouldn't comment that it's the same as any other work.

NP. Umm minus the egg retrieval (and hormone injections to hyperovulate is a big deal. Just me I’ve done both. Also there are lots of options for natural cycle transfers involving minimal hormones. So maybe you don’t know as much as you think.

Did you read the article??? They absolutely get FSH and progesterone injections plus transvaginal ultrasounds no matter what.

I’m one of the people who said that if circumstances were different I would be a surrogate.

I have done seven cycles of IVF. I’m not incredibly fertile, which is why I have to say “if circumstances were different”. I know exactly what it entails. I also know that the worst part of IVF by far is the superovulation and retrieval, not the preparation for transfer. I did quite a few frozen cycles, which is analogous to what a surrogate would experience, and they were absolutely nothing compared to the ovulation and retrieval cycles. Many protocols don’t even require multiple injections, just oral medication and then oral or vaginal suppositories. They are a walk in the park.

The person who compares it to a veterinary transfer and says that the receiving party is a “less valuable animal” is frankly nuts. Come back to me when the gestational animal has freely entered into a contract that involves appropriate compensation.

Truly one of the stupider analogies out there.

Anonymous wrote:If you don’t have any medical reason to do so. I just don’t want to be pregnant again, gain weight and have to try to lose it again. have my body change permanently, give birth etc.

And I can easily afford a surrogate.

Would you do it in my situation?

Is it ethical to buy sperm and eggs? I feel like buying the use of a uterus is more ethical than buying someone's genetic material. The surrogate has no genetic connection to the baby, but an egg or sperm donor DOES.

The only reason I wouldn't hire a surrogate is that you can't really control what she does while pregnant. I was a super vigilant while pregnant. There is no way you can control what a surrogate does, who they sleep with, what they ingest, or expose themselves to.