Interesting Dilemna

Quantum Windbag

Gold Member
May 9, 2010
58,308
5,099
245
Can parents force a surrogate to have an abortion? If not, can they be held legally responsible for a child they do not want?

When a B.C. couple discovered that the fetus their surrogate mother was carrying was likely to be born with Down syndrome, they wanted an abortion. The surrogate, however, was determined to take the pregnancy to term, sparking a disagreement that has raised thorny questions about the increasingly common arrangements.Under the agreement the trio signed, the surrogate’s choice would mean absolving the couple of any responsibility for raising the child, the treating doctor told a recent fertility-medicine conference.
Dr. Ken Seethram, revealing the unusual situation for the first time, said it raises questions about whether government oversight of contracts between mothers and “commissioning” parents is needed.
A bioethicist who has studied the issue extensively argues that contract law should not apply to the transaction, unless human life is to be treated like widgets in a factory.
“Should the rules of commerce apply to the creation of children? No, because children get hurt,” said Juliet Guichon of the University of Calgary. “It’s kind of like stopping the production line: ‘Oh, oh, there’s a flaw.’ It makes sense in a production scenario, but in reproduction it’s a lot more problematic.”


Couple urged surrogate to abort fetus due to defect

Obviously Canada has different laws, but in the US most states would hold the father responsible for child support regardless of any contract they might have.
 
That is interesting. I would assume a contract between the to-be parents and surrogate would outline what would happen in this event, and what would be considered a breach of the contract.
 
Good question!

In my opinion the surrogate is breaking the bounds of the contract. She is nothing but an incubator. You could argue she is "kidnapping" your baby.
 
Can a father demand a mother abort, and wouldn't his decision be just as valid? Kind of a similar "dilemma" (I guess).
 
Can parents force a surrogate to have an abortion? If not, can they be held legally responsible for a child they do not want?

When a B.C. couple discovered that the fetus their surrogate mother was carrying was likely to be born with Down syndrome, they wanted an abortion. The surrogate, however, was determined to take the pregnancy to term, sparking a disagreement that has raised thorny questions about the increasingly common arrangements.Under the agreement the trio signed, the surrogate’s choice would mean absolving the couple of any responsibility for raising the child, the treating doctor told a recent fertility-medicine conference.
Dr. Ken Seethram, revealing the unusual situation for the first time, said it raises questions about whether government oversight of contracts between mothers and “commissioning” parents is needed.
A bioethicist who has studied the issue extensively argues that contract law should not apply to the transaction, unless human life is to be treated like widgets in a factory.
“Should the rules of commerce apply to the creation of children? No, because children get hurt,” said Juliet Guichon of the University of Calgary. “It’s kind of like stopping the production line: ‘Oh, oh, there’s a flaw.’ It makes sense in a production scenario, but in reproduction it’s a lot more problematic.”


Couple urged surrogate to abort fetus due to defect

Obviously Canada has different laws, but in the US most states would hold the father responsible for child support regardless of any contract they might have.

On the first question I would hope not. On the second, again I would hope not.
 
Can a father demand a mother abort, and wouldn't his decision be just as valid? Kind of a similar "dilemma" (I guess).

In this case, technically the surrogate is not the mother. The mother in this case wants an abortion.
 
Last edited:
Good question!

In my opinion the surrogate is breaking the bounds of the contract. She is nothing but an incubator. You could argue she is "kidnapping" your baby.

You would in fact be arguing that she took the baby you no longer want.
 
Good question!

In my opinion the surrogate is breaking the bounds of the contract. She is nothing but an incubator. You could argue she is "kidnapping" your baby.

You would in fact be arguing that she took the baby you no longer want.

Yes, but that would still be considered "kidnapping"

One could argue abandonment. Kidnapping??? Maybe not. What action did the surrogate do after the fact, other than complete an obligation??? The Fetus was already put in her charge,when she was implanted with it. One might argue,breach of contract. Why would the perspective parents want to terminate the pregnancy anyway??? Genetic problem? Medical? Legitimate claim? If I can't raise my baby nobody can??? What??? Personally I would usually rather see the baby live. Secondly, live with someone that can love and appreciate it. Is blood thicker than water, yes, when it is willing.
 
Good question!

In my opinion the surrogate is breaking the bounds of the contract. She is nothing but an incubator. You could argue she is "kidnapping" your baby.

You would in fact be arguing that she took the baby you no longer want.

Yes, but that would still be considered "kidnapping"

I know that there have been cases where surrogates have refused to give up a baby after it was born. If I remember correctly, the courts ruled that she did not have to, and that carrying the child bestowed parental rights on her, even if she was not genetically related.

I doubt any court would allow kidnapping charges to proceed against the birth mother of a child if the genetic parents wanted her to abort it.
 
You would in fact be arguing that she took the baby you no longer want.

Yes, but that would still be considered "kidnapping"

One could argue abandonment. Kidnapping??? Maybe not. What action did the surrogate do after the fact, other than complete an obligation??? The Fetus was already put in her charge,when she was implanted with it. One might argue,breach of contract. Why would the perspective parents want to terminate the pregnancy anyway??? Genetic problem? Medical? Legitimate claim? If I can't raise my baby nobody can??? What??? Personally I would usually rather see the baby live. Secondly, live with someone that can love and appreciate it. Is blood thicker than water, yes, when it is willing.

Abandonment is not abortion. The parents are not abandoning the fetus they are making the choice of aborting "their" pregnancy.

The fetus may have been put in the surrogates "charge" but it is still not her fetus.

 
You would in fact be arguing that she took the baby you no longer want.

Yes, but that would still be considered "kidnapping"

I know that there have been cases where surrogates have refused to give up a baby after it was born. If I remember correctly, the courts ruled that she did not have to, and that carrying the child bestowed parental rights on her, even if she was not genetically related.

I doubt any court would allow kidnapping charges to proceed against the birth mother of a child if the genetic parents wanted her to abort it.

I think it would be an interesting case to try.
 
Yes, but that would still be considered "kidnapping"

One could argue abandonment. Kidnapping??? Maybe not. What action did the surrogate do after the fact, other than complete an obligation??? The Fetus was already put in her charge,when she was implanted with it. One might argue,breach of contract. Why would the perspective parents want to terminate the pregnancy anyway??? Genetic problem? Medical? Legitimate claim? If I can't raise my baby nobody can??? What??? Personally I would usually rather see the baby live. Secondly, live with someone that can love and appreciate it. Is blood thicker than water, yes, when it is willing.

Abandonment is not abortion. The parents are not abandoning the fetus they are making the choice of aborting "their" pregnancy.

The fetus may have been put in the surrogates "charge" but it is still not her fetus.


What if the surrogate does not condone abortion for Religious reasons,or ethical reasons??? What does the contract stipulate??? The Surrogates body is not the property of the parents,nor should it be under their arbitrary control. Again, what is the reason for wanting the pregnancy terminated???
 
You would in fact be arguing that she took the baby you no longer want.

Yes, but that would still be considered "kidnapping"

I know that there have been cases where surrogates have refused to give up a baby after it was born. If I remember correctly, the courts ruled that she did not have to, and that carrying the child bestowed parental rights on her, even if she was not genetically related.

I doubt any court would allow kidnapping charges to proceed against the birth mother of a child if the genetic parents wanted her to abort it.

If I remember correctly there was also a case where the surrogate gave birth to twins...and the parents decided they only wanted to take one baby. The surrogate fought for custody of both babies after that...and won.

The parents rights to the baby are not written in stone.
 
One could argue abandonment. Kidnapping??? Maybe not. What action did the surrogate do after the fact, other than complete an obligation??? The Fetus was already put in her charge,when she was implanted with it. One might argue,breach of contract. Why would the perspective parents want to terminate the pregnancy anyway??? Genetic problem? Medical? Legitimate claim? If I can't raise my baby nobody can??? What??? Personally I would usually rather see the baby live. Secondly, live with someone that can love and appreciate it. Is blood thicker than water, yes, when it is willing.

Abandonment is not abortion. The parents are not abandoning the fetus they are making the choice of aborting "their" pregnancy.

The fetus may have been put in the surrogates "charge" but it is still not her fetus.


What if the surrogate does not condone abortion for Religious reasons,or ethical reasons??? What does the contract stipulate??? The Surrogates body is not the property of the parents,nor should it be under their arbitrary control. Again, what is the reason for wanting the pregnancy terminated???


It doesn't make a difference to me what their reasons are, it is theirs.
 
Abandonment is not abortion. The parents are not abandoning the fetus they are making the choice of aborting "their" pregnancy.

The fetus may have been put in the surrogates "charge" but it is still not her fetus.


What if the surrogate does not condone abortion for Religious reasons, or ethical reasons??? What does the contract stipulate??? The Surrogates body is not the property of the parents,nor should it be under their arbitrary control. Again, what is the reason for wanting the pregnancy terminated???


It doesn't make a difference to me what their reasons are, it is theirs.

That is the issue at hand which is in question. If the Surrogate agrees to do what she signs up for, she has taken nothing. I realize that there are reasons and justifications for abortion, that is why I truly believe the choice to choose Life should be voluntary, not forced, surrogate aside, that is my position. If the contract does not stipulate the parents having the right to terminate the pregnancy, I don't see them having a legitimate claim.
 
What if the surrogate does not condone abortion for Religious reasons, or ethical reasons??? What does the contract stipulate??? The Surrogates body is not the property of the parents,nor should it be under their arbitrary control. Again, what is the reason for wanting the pregnancy terminated???


It doesn't make a difference to me what their reasons are, it is theirs.

That is the issue at hand which is in question. If the Surrogate agrees to do what she signs up for, she has taken nothing. I realize that there are reasons and justifications for abortion, that is why I truly believe the choice to choose Life should be voluntary, not forced, surrogate aside, that is my position. If the contract does not stipulate the parents having the right to terminate the pregnancy, I don't see them having a legitimate claim.

I am not sure that they can enforce a contract that gave them the right to demand an abortion, which is why this particular contract was written to absolve the couple of responsibility if the surrogate decided to carry the pregnancy to term if there were complications the parents objected to.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top