Options
Unwanted Downs baby left with surrogate mother
tiacat
Posts: 22,521
Forum Member
✭✭✭
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/aug/01/baby-downs-syndrome-abandoned-thailand-australian-donations
What a dreadful story. I dont even know if I agree with surrogacy but whether you do or not, this poor child has now been abandoned by the potential parents. It sounds like the surrogate mother will keep the child.
What a dreadful story. I dont even know if I agree with surrogacy but whether you do or not, this poor child has now been abandoned by the potential parents. It sounds like the surrogate mother will keep the child.
0
Comments
Something I know very little about, surrogacy law. An article about the need for reform in light of this case. What a beautiful baby he is, this is heartbreaking.
Where was that? Can you terminate one of a twin, I dont really know the science behind it.
If Im honest I dont really like the whole surrogacy and even IVF thing, there are so many children needing adoptive and foster parents but people want 'perfect' babies.
I read that as well but it still doesn't justify them essentially saying "fine, you deal with it".
but then I suppose if they'd gone through an official government agency in Australia instead of going to Thailand, there'd be more help and protection for everyone concerned.
Is it possible to terminate one of twins or did they want to terminate both?
I've not heard/read this anywhere. ('m not saying it's not correct).
Edit: See someone else has also read it.
I've just noticed there's a link to that story on the same page. I can't get it to work on here. It's the first story under related articles.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/thailand/11006524/Legal-situation-of-surrogacy-explained.html
I'm sure they will be.
Edit: Okay, have just found out that they did leave the baby with the surrogate mother because the child had Down's Syndrome. Unbelievable.
That makes this even worse. Just goes to show that love's conditional with some parents.
Or it could be that some women who can't conceive naturally might want a baby that shares their DNA. Some women that can't conceive naturally might want a baby that's part of them. It might not be about wanting a 'perfect baby'.
Why cant the parents financially support the child?
I understand that, but that is part of the 'perfection' that the child is 'theirs' biologically.
I realise its not a popular view in a society where we are told we can have everything we want, but if you cant have children naturally then I dont agree that we should create them unnaturally. By the way I notice that you focus on women not being able to conceive, I am talking about men and women.
She is right. I am lucky to have known this person. I feel sorry for those who have denied themselves such an opportunity.
Things in the world advance. IVF was probably created to allow women who couldn't conceive naturally to have children. I was focusing on women because it's the woman who has the sperm inside her when it develops into a baby.
Of course, but I tend to feel that just because you can, doesnt mean you should.
Anyway, Im aware that Im in a total minority but it doesnt change my view.
Yes, if he had got someone pregnant and they had not wanted to terminate at his request, he would still be liable for financially supporting the child. How does this woman in Thailand enforce that though?