Wall Street Journal decries loss of 'right' to be surrogate

Indian surrogates

The Wall Street Journal owned by billionaire media magnate Rupert Murdock rarely sheds tears for the poor and downtrodden.  It's come to bat, however, for Indian women threatened with losing income as surrogates if the India passes proposed legislation which criminalizes surrogacy for foreigners. A government-appointed body has already notified clinics they should stop offering such services to couples overseas. Since WSJ's readers are comprised largely of moneyed readers who are the ones to seek out surrogacy services, WSJ's crusading for wombs-for-hire is merely self-serving.


In "India's Surrogate Birth Mothers Grow Anxious after Restrictive New Regulations,"* WSJ profiles an Indian woman who earns $3,800 for the baby, plus $150 a month during the pregnancy--about twice what she could earn in her usual occupation as a maid. Another woman claims she is getting better care from the surrogacy clinic than she got from government doctors when she had her own children. A third said she wanted money to buy a house with a separate room for her two children.

SURROGACY EXPLOITS THE POOR

Jane

So yes, these women and the many other surrogates could use the money or, in some cases, need the money. The government's action is intended to end exploitation of women. Clinics deny exploitation and WSJ gives their argument more credence than that of the Indian government. Clinics claim that prospective surrogates are thoroughly counseled and the doctor's primary interest is the health of mother and child. (Well, natch, a sick mother can't deliver a healthy child and a dead or crippled baby brings no money). It's exploitation all the same, which is precisely the reason for the new rules: to protect poor and illiterate women.

Not mentioned is the unequal economic footing between surrogates and those paying for their services, what Barnard College president Debora Spar, author of The Baby Business describes as "Rich people buying bodily functions of poor women." WSJ's indignation reminds me of an infamous 1905 U. S. Supreme Court case, Lochner v. New York. The Court struct down a state law designed to protect bakers from exploitation by limiting their work hours to 10 per day and 60 per week. The Court held "there is no reasonable ground for interfering with liberty of person or the right of free contract by determining the hours of labor in the occupation of a baker." In other words, bakery owners can go on exploiting the workers who make their products. This case has since been overruled.

The surrogacy business isn't the win-win arrangement the article implies. "Intended parents" can refuse to accept the baby if it isn't "perfect." It happened where the intended parents left an infant with Down syndrome with the surrogate mother in Thailand. A clinic can close, leaving pregnant women in the lurch. Tonya Collins, who owned California-based SurroGenesis absconded with $2.5 million paid by hopeful parents and leaving a pregnant surrogate, Salina Ramirez, a single mother with two young children, without any way to pay for her medical care. The intended parents, a Spanish couple, came up with some money and took the baby. Ramirez was left with medical bills and received only half her promised fee.

SURROGACY IS CHILD SELLING
Having babies has health risks and having lots of babies increases the risks. These include uterine rupture, gall bladder disease, depletion of stores of iron and other nutrients, varicose veins, blood clots, and dental caries, even death. If the surrogate dies, how will her other children be cared for? If surrogacy were merely an altruistic act, it would not be the desperately poor women around the world--including the United States--who take on this risky job. No matter how you slice it, surrogacy is exploitative. Money changes hands, poor women are at risk, bartering their body parts and future health for the advantage of those who can pay. Though the circumstances are different, Margaret Atwood expertly nailed this kind of exploration in  The Handmaid's Tale, a book everyone considering surrogacy needs to read.

Adoptive parent Professor David Smolin of Cumberland Law School, Samford University argues that most surrogacy arrangements as currently practiced constitute the sale of children and should be illegal. We wholeheartedly agree. At the same time we recognize that surrogacy is not going away; the demand for babies with the genetic traits of those who will raise them is simply too great and the promise of large profits too attractive. If India shuts its doors, windows will open in other countries. Last fall I met a woman at a Portland adoption conference who was brokering surrogacy agreements with Romanian women.  Reasonable regulations, though could do much to reduce the exploitation.--jane

*Referring to these women as "surrogate birth" mothers rather than simply "surrogate" mothers seems an over kill, a way to reinforce the notion that they are not, no way in hell, real mothers.
____________________
On a personal note. I attended the wedding of my granddaughter Chelsea, the daughter of my lost daughter Rebecca, last weekend. A grand event--not in the sense of a large cathedral, a fancy hotel ballroom, an elaborately catered dinner--but because of the overflowing love and joy.  I was thrilled to be included as a grandmother of the bride, no "birth", "first" or "natural" qualifiers. I met my new grandson-in-law, his parents, and brothers, and several members of Rebecca's adoptive family for the first time. Wonderful people, all.
_______________________________________
SOURCES
Wall Street Journal, India's Surrogate Birth Mothers Grow Anxious after Restrictive New Regulations, 11/16/15
Thailand's booming Business in surrogacy is an ethical swamp
PBS, Surrogacy: Wombs for Rent (2009)
NY Daily News, The health risks of many pregnancies (12/16/09)
David Smolin, Surrogacy as the Sale of Children (2015)
Lochner v. New York, 198 US 45 (1905)

FROM FMF
Making babies just to make ends meet
Surrogate Mother Wins Right to Sue for Custody; Police Chief Sentenced for Stealing Surrogate Items
When a child of surrogacy asks: Who is my mommy?
Thailand's booming business in surrogacy is an ethical swamp
Baby Farming Hits a Bump in the Road
Adoption from India: 'Second' mother now runs orphanage there

THANKS FOR ORDERING ANYTHING THROUGH THE PORTALS OF FMF. We appreciate it very much.

TO READ

The Baby Business: How Money, Science, and Politics Drive the Commerce of Conception

BY Debora L. Spar 

"This is good stuff-if not juicy, and Spar casts a wide net that doesn't miss a thing: conception techniques, fertility markets, surrogacy, designer babies, human cloning, and adoption. The writer also has the guts to have a lucid, constructive point of view-never backing away from the controversial subjects many would balk about discussing. This book is a must read for anyone who might, is, or has gone through any of the processes above, and for the rest of us like me, just a great eye-opening read. In fact, I kept thinking as the pages turned: "I had no idea..." As a piece of scholarly writing it is immaculate (check out the pages of footnotes!), but more impressive is the fact that Spar's writing style is trenchant, entertaining and unwavering in it's ability to present a point of view to the reader. I wasn't expecting it, but Spar continually challenges and provokes as she weaves her riveting tale of the dynamics of a topic-both moral and technical-that is dear to the hearts of us all: babies. Wow. A scholarly page-turner!? Shouldn't there be an award for that? It's great read, and I highly recommend it."--Amazon reviewer
The Handmaid's Tale
By Margaret Atwood
"A novel that brilliantly illuminates some of the darker interconnections between politics and sex . . . Just as the world of Orwell's 1984 gripped our imaginations, so will the world of Atwood's handmaid!"--Washington Post Book World