Anonymous wrote:

Most of Europe is also Roman Catholic and abortion is a mortal sin.

Well, but most of Europe. Maybe most of France and Italy. Certainly not Germany.

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.

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.

If the government will pay for your abortion, you don’t need to wait past 12 weeks.

In the U.S., most non-health-related abortions later than 12 weeks are because the woman is too poor to get it done immediately.

Anonymous wrote:My sister lives in Italy, is married to an Italian man, and has been an Italian citizen for nearly 20 years. They had an incredibly hard time conceiving. She was dead set against surrogacy, which is fine and was her personal choice so they ended up researching adoption. Due to their advanced age 39 and 40, they were told they would never be able to adopt an infant. They would at best be able to adopt a 7 or 8-year-old. They opted for IVF. The Italian government pays for 5 rounds and they ended up having a girl after the 5th round.

I think it's extremely irrational and irresponsible to outlaw surrogacy while at the same time sponsoring IVF. Especially in a country that struggles with birth rates so much.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It isn’t really an issue of progressive or not. There is a just a different conception of human dignity and the role of the market in Europe than the US. In their view it infringes human dignity to allow “renting wombs”. Whereas in the US you tend to believe that people should have the right to make money from their body parts if they want to.

And, in the US there is little thought given to the welfare of the resulting baby, which is also consistent with the US versus Europe. The concern is not just exploitation of women, it’s also exploitation of the baby.

It’s not exploitation of anyone in the US. You should be allowed to carry a child for someone else, if that’s what you want to do. Treating grown women like children and telling them what they can do with their bodies is a scary trend and it’s increasing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Your post is garbled, but if you're saying nobody gets paid 150k to do this, you're absolutely wrong. yes they do.

Most of Europe is also Roman Catholic and abortion is a mortal sin.

Anonymous wrote:

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 wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It isn’t really an issue of progressive or not. There is a just a different conception of human dignity and the role of the market in Europe than the US. In their view it infringes human dignity to allow “renting wombs”. Whereas in the US you tend to believe that people should have the right to make money from their body parts if they want to.

And, in the US there is little thought given to the welfare of the resulting baby, which is also consistent with the US versus Europe. The concern is not just exploitation of women, it’s also exploitation of the baby.

It’s not exploitation of anyone in the US. You should be allowed to carry a child for someone else, if that’s what you want to do. Treating grown women like children and telling them what they can do with their bodies is a scary trend and it’s increasing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

So your solution is to exploit women?

Why do you want to control what women do with their bodies?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It isn’t really an issue of progressive or not. There is a just a different conception of human dignity and the role of the market in Europe than the US. In their view it infringes human dignity to allow “renting wombs”. Whereas in the US you tend to believe that people should have the right to make money from their body parts if they want to.

And, in the US there is little thought given to the welfare of the resulting baby, which is also consistent with the US versus Europe. The concern is not just exploitation of women, it’s also exploitation of the baby.

It’s not exploitation of anyone in the US. You should be allowed to carry a child for someone else, if that’s what you want to do. Treating grown women like children and telling them what they can do with their bodies is a scary trend and it’s increasing.

We get it, you think you’re entitled to buy some other poor impoverished woman’s womb for your personal selfish gain. Disgusting.

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.