Anonymous wrote:I missed some of the responses in the middle pages of this thread, but did anyone notice how much the Doctor really validated and egged on everything Bi was writing to her? Saying things along the lines of “Totally - the agency is just saying that to try to get you to back down” etc. It’s in the exhibits to the suit. I was a big fan of her YouTube videos when learning about the IUI and IVF processes but this is not a good look for her. She did mostly cover her a** I think.

But also WARNING - the unedited photo of baby Leon is on the very last page of one of the files. It’s included feet first so you have some warning. It’s heartbreaking.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It as also heartbreaking to read that the surrogate of the baby girl had complications and needed a hysterectomy after giving birth. The article mentioned an issue with the placenta which has DNA from the parents. Shouldn’t the biological parents health histories have to be disclosed to surrogates so they know the complete risk.

If a potential GC wants to know the medical history of the IPs, she can require that as a condition of entering into a surrogacy contract. IPs, of course, are free to decide that they'd rather go with a different GC. It is no one's business what a GC and IPs agree to in their private surrogacy contract.

This presumes that the surrogate even knows that these complications are a potential risk. These women generally are not medically savvy and are looking to earn money. This whole industry is predatory and should be outlawed. The only reason it hadn't been is because rich people reap the benefits.
Another interesting story is "Her Body, My Baby" which was in the NYT about 15 years ago. The woman wasn't overtly nuts like this one but there was still a big class differential that permeated the story.
I would carry a child for my sister or cousin who was unable to for free. I would not do it for some rich stranger who decided at 43 that she was ready to be a mother.

This line reeks of disdain for women who are mothers later in life. See the PP's remark about becoming trad Caths when an older woman has children a non-traditional way. Do you think we were all supposed to meet The One at 25 and be done with kids by 30?

Of Course not. Since time immemorial we have been dealing with this. If a working class woman marries late in life does she get to borrow another woman's uterus? Maybe she dreams of a baby too.
But that's only an option for you important people with the money to pay.

Rich people have more options in virtually every aspect of life. That doesn't make surrogacy wrong.

We’re not talking about whether surrogacy is wrong. We’re talking about ways to protect the gestational carrier during the process given that all the money and power is typically in the hands of the intended parent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope the surrogate puts up a go fundme to get some legal representation to sue the pants off this vindictive psycho. I’m not a lawyer but harassment and defamation has definitely been done

I belong to several moms online groups and everyone wants to contribute. This is crazy abuse by a crazy person and the surrogate doesn't deserve one bit of this no matter how you feel about surrogacy.

Well, the article references how many surrogacy boards for IPs supported Bi, including in her harassment campaign, so I don’t think your sentiment is universal among parents who use surrogates.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It as also heartbreaking to read that the surrogate of the baby girl had complications and needed a hysterectomy after giving birth. The article mentioned an issue with the placenta which has DNA from the parents. Shouldn’t the biological parents health histories have to be disclosed to surrogates so they know the complete risk.

If a potential GC wants to know the medical history of the IPs, she can require that as a condition of entering into a surrogacy contract. IPs, of course, are free to decide that they'd rather go with a different GC. It is no one's business what a GC and IPs agree to in their private surrogacy contract.

This presumes that the surrogate even knows that these complications are a potential risk. These women generally are not medically savvy and are looking to earn money. This whole industry is predatory and should be outlawed. The only reason it hadn't been is because rich people reap the benefits.
Another interesting story is "Her Body, My Baby" which was in the NYT about 15 years ago. The woman wasn't overtly nuts like this one but there was still a big class differential that permeated the story.
I would carry a child for my sister or cousin who was unable to for free. I would not do it for some rich stranger who decided at 43 that she was ready to be a mother.

This line reeks of disdain for women who are mothers later in life. See the PP's remark about becoming trad Caths when an older woman has children a non-traditional way. Do you think we were all supposed to meet The One at 25 and be done with kids by 30?

Of Course not. Since time immemorial we have been dealing with this. If a working class woman marries late in life does she get to borrow another woman's uterus? Maybe she dreams of a baby too.
But that's only an option for you important people with the money to pay.

Rich people have more options in virtually every aspect of life. That doesn't make surrogacy wrong.

Anonymous wrote:I missed some of the responses in the middle pages of this thread, but did anyone notice how much the Doctor really validated and egged on everything Bi was writing to her? Saying things along the lines of “Totally - the agency is just saying that to try to get you to back down” etc. It’s in the exhibits to the suit. I was a big fan of her YouTube videos when learning about the IUI and IVF processes but this is not a good look for her. She did mostly cover her a** I think.

But also WARNING - the unedited photo of baby Leon is on the very last page of one of the files. It’s included feet first so you have some warning. It’s heartbreaking.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It as also heartbreaking to read that the surrogate of the baby girl had complications and needed a hysterectomy after giving birth. The article mentioned an issue with the placenta which has DNA from the parents. Shouldn’t the biological parents health histories have to be disclosed to surrogates so they know the complete risk.

If a potential GC wants to know the medical history of the IPs, she can require that as a condition of entering into a surrogacy contract. IPs, of course, are free to decide that they'd rather go with a different GC. It is no one's business what a GC and IPs agree to in their private surrogacy contract.

This presumes that the surrogate even knows that these complications are a potential risk. These women generally are not medically savvy and are looking to earn money. This whole industry is predatory and should be outlawed. The only reason it hadn't been is because rich people reap the benefits.
Another interesting story is "Her Body, My Baby" which was in the NYT about 15 years ago. The woman wasn't overtly nuts like this one but there was still a big class differential that permeated the story.
I would carry a child for my sister or cousin who was unable to for free. I would not do it for some rich stranger who decided at 43 that she was ready to be a mother.

This line reeks of disdain for women who are mothers later in life. See the PP's remark about becoming trad Caths when an older woman has children a non-traditional way. Do you think we were all supposed to meet The One at 25 and be done with kids by 30?

Of Course not. Since time immemorial we have been dealing with this. If a working class woman marries late in life does she get to borrow another woman's uterus? Maybe she dreams of a baby too.
But that's only an option for you important people with the money to pay.

Rich people have more options in virtually every aspect of life. That doesn't make surrogacy wrong.

Should you be able to pay to get your name moved to the top of the list when you need an organ transplant?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does the same person keep posting surrogacy articles? What a weird obsession.

Weird obsession? It's modern day slavery and also literal child trafficking. It's immoral, disgusting and should be illegal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It as also heartbreaking to read that the surrogate of the baby girl had complications and needed a hysterectomy after giving birth. The article mentioned an issue with the placenta which has DNA from the parents. Shouldn’t the biological parents health histories have to be disclosed to surrogates so they know the complete risk.

If a potential GC wants to know the medical history of the IPs, she can require that as a condition of entering into a surrogacy contract. IPs, of course, are free to decide that they'd rather go with a different GC. It is no one's business what a GC and IPs agree to in their private surrogacy contract.

This presumes that the surrogate even knows that these complications are a potential risk. These women generally are not medically savvy and are looking to earn money. This whole industry is predatory and should be outlawed. The only reason it hadn't been is because rich people reap the benefits.
Another interesting story is "Her Body, My Baby" which was in the NYT about 15 years ago. The woman wasn't overtly nuts like this one but there was still a big class differential that permeated the story.
I would carry a child for my sister or cousin who was unable to for free. I would not do it for some rich stranger who decided at 43 that she was ready to be a mother.

This line reeks of disdain for women who are mothers later in life. See the PP's remark about becoming trad Caths when an older woman has children a non-traditional way. Do you think we were all supposed to meet The One at 25 and be done with kids by 30?

Of Course not. Since time immemorial we have been dealing with this. If a working class woman marries late in life does she get to borrow another woman's uterus? Maybe she dreams of a baby too.
But that's only an option for you important people with the money to pay.

Rich people have more options in virtually every aspect of life. That doesn't make surrogacy wrong.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It as also heartbreaking to read that the surrogate of the baby girl had complications and needed a hysterectomy after giving birth. The article mentioned an issue with the placenta which has DNA from the parents. Shouldn’t the biological parents health histories have to be disclosed to surrogates so they know the complete risk.

If a potential GC wants to know the medical history of the IPs, she can require that as a condition of entering into a surrogacy contract. IPs, of course, are free to decide that they'd rather go with a different GC. It is no one's business what a GC and IPs agree to in their private surrogacy contract.

This presumes that the surrogate even knows that these complications are a potential risk. These women generally are not medically savvy and are looking to earn money. This whole industry is predatory and should be outlawed. The only reason it hadn't been is because rich people reap the benefits.
Another interesting story is "Her Body, My Baby" which was in the NYT about 15 years ago. The woman wasn't overtly nuts like this one but there was still a big class differential that permeated the story.
I would carry a child for my sister or cousin who was unable to for free. I would not do it for some rich stranger who decided at 43 that she was ready to be a mother.

This line reeks of disdain for women who are mothers later in life. See the PP's remark about becoming trad Caths when an older woman has children a non-traditional way. Do you think we were all supposed to meet The One at 25 and be done with kids by 30?

Of Course not. Since time immemorial we have been dealing with this. If a working class woman marries late in life does she get to borrow another woman's uterus? Maybe she dreams of a baby too.
But that's only an option for you important people with the money to pay.

Rich people have more options in virtually every aspect of life. That doesn't make surrogacy wrong.

Anonymous wrote:IN THE MONTHS after Leon died, Bi (intended parent)
Called the FBI 12 times. Reported Smith (surrogate) SAI (agency), the hospital, and Clarity escrow to more than a dozen state and federal regulators and numerous professional organizations. Launched a new round of her $30 million venture fund, backed by Marc Andreessen and David Sacks, President Trump’s “AI and crypto czar,” on Leon’s due date. Posted Leon’s ChatGPT-written endorsement from heaven, offering his “eternal blessings” for her work. Created TikToks, Instagram Reels, Facebook posts, X threads, LinkedIn Updates, and a website for her advocacy. Posted links disclosing surrogate Smith’s full name, photo, address, employer, mortgage license number, and son’s first name to her website

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope the surrogate puts up a go fundme to get some legal representation to sue the pants off this vindictive psycho. I’m not a lawyer but harassment and defamation has definitely been done

I belong to several moms online groups and everyone wants to contribute. This is crazy abuse by a crazy person and the surrogate doesn't deserve one bit of this no matter how you feel about surrogacy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It as also heartbreaking to read that the surrogate of the baby girl had complications and needed a hysterectomy after giving birth. The article mentioned an issue with the placenta which has DNA from the parents. Shouldn’t the biological parents health histories have to be disclosed to surrogates so they know the complete risk.

If a potential GC wants to know the medical history of the IPs, she can require that as a condition of entering into a surrogacy contract. IPs, of course, are free to decide that they'd rather go with a different GC. It is no one's business what a GC and IPs agree to in their private surrogacy contract.

This presumes that the surrogate even knows that these complications are a potential risk. These women generally are not medically savvy and are looking to earn money. This whole industry is predatory and should be outlawed. The only reason it hadn't been is because rich people reap the benefits.
Another interesting story is "Her Body, My Baby" which was in the NYT about 15 years ago. The woman wasn't overtly nuts like this one but there was still a big class differential that permeated the story.
I would carry a child for my sister or cousin who was unable to for free. I would not do it for some rich stranger who decided at 43 that she was ready to be a mother.

This line reeks of disdain for women who are mothers later in life. See the PP's remark about becoming trad Caths when an older woman has children a non-traditional way. Do you think we were all supposed to meet The One at 25 and be done with kids by 30?

Of Course not. Since time immemorial we have been dealing with this. If a working class woman marries late in life does she get to borrow another woman's uterus? Maybe she dreams of a baby too.
But that's only an option for you important people with the money to pay.

Anonymous wrote:I hope the surrogate puts up a go fundme to get some legal representation to sue the pants off this vindictive psycho. I’m not a lawyer but harassment and defamation has definitely been done

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.