Silhouette
Gold Member
- Jul 15, 2013
- 25,815
- 1,938
- 265
Let's compare surrogacy without a custodial intermediary (legally called a "guardian ad litem") to"child-trafficking".
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/18/u...-face-a-maze-of-laws-state-by-state.html?_r=0
more..
What else is private surrogacy besides a private contract between parties for the transfer of a child from its parents to non-parents? Were there adoption proceedings? A custodial overseer? No? Then how is it intrinsically different from selling your baby on the private market?
Since this announcement by the Kansas Governor: BAD News for Gay Couples in Kansas... Liberals are Crying
There will be a loophole exploited, that is already well underway, of private contracts of surrogacy between lesbians (who cannot reproduce without men) and gay men (who cannot reproduce without women). The problem is especially onerous because gay men have no womb. So only their sperm has "custody" of the child born. Or the sperm of a donor male.
I may be wrong on the laws and I hope someone will school me if I am. But if there is no intermediary between these "arrangements", besides just a private contract drawn up in some dusty/shady lawyer's office, how is this different than "babies for sale"? (Child-trafficking)
...like no woman strapped for cash would ever consider selling her infant to creepy customers when she already has six of her own..? Just let the "booming industry" self-regulate?...in hard economic times...What could go wrong?...
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/18/u...-face-a-maze-of-laws-state-by-state.html?_r=0
Surrogates and Couples Face a Maze of Laws, State by State SEPT. 17, 2014
While surrogacy is far more accepted in the United States than in most countries, and increasing rapidly (more than 2,000 babies will be born through it here this year), it remains, like abortion, a polarizing and charged issue. There is nothing resembling a national consensus on how to handle it and no federal law, leaving the states free to do as they wish...In five states, surrogacy contracts are void and unenforceable, and in Washington, D.C., where new legislation has been proposed, surrogacy carries criminal penalties. Seven states have at least one court opinion upholding some form of surrogacy....California has the most permissive law, allowing anyone to hire a woman to carry a baby and the birth certificate to carry the names of the intended parents. As a result, California has a booming surrogacy industry, attracting clients from around the world.
more..
The issue has produced some strange bedfellows: In several states, for example, Kathleen Sloan, an abortion rights advocate who is a board member of the National Organization for Women, has worked with Catholic and conservative groups to oppose surrogacy because she sees it as a form of exploitation. But most other feminists have backed off....“It’s rarer than it was in the ’80s and ’90s to see feminists flat-out opposing surrogacy,” said Sara Ainsworth, director of legal advocacy at the National Advocates for Pregnant Women. “But it’s complex and there’s a lot of discomfort surrounding the issue, so many women’s groups have not taken a formal position.”
What else is private surrogacy besides a private contract between parties for the transfer of a child from its parents to non-parents? Were there adoption proceedings? A custodial overseer? No? Then how is it intrinsically different from selling your baby on the private market?
Since this announcement by the Kansas Governor: BAD News for Gay Couples in Kansas... Liberals are Crying
Gov. Sam Brownback issued an executive order Tuesday prohibiting state government from taking action against clergy members or religious organizations that deny services to couples based on religious beliefs.
Among other things, the order is intended to protect religious organizations that provide adoption services for the state from having to place children with gay couples if that conflicts with their beliefs.
There will be a loophole exploited, that is already well underway, of private contracts of surrogacy between lesbians (who cannot reproduce without men) and gay men (who cannot reproduce without women). The problem is especially onerous because gay men have no womb. So only their sperm has "custody" of the child born. Or the sperm of a donor male.
I may be wrong on the laws and I hope someone will school me if I am. But if there is no intermediary between these "arrangements", besides just a private contract drawn up in some dusty/shady lawyer's office, how is this different than "babies for sale"? (Child-trafficking)
...like no woman strapped for cash would ever consider selling her infant to creepy customers when she already has six of her own..? Just let the "booming industry" self-regulate?...in hard economic times...What could go wrong?...
Last edited: