Robbie Williams and surrogacy

So, given that everybody is agreed separation from the mother is damaging and to be avoided, why is OK for a couple with 2 children to order 2 more?

And why is it OK for 2 men to order a baby because they want one?

Maddyone: thoughtful posts as ever.

Because there is an agreement between two adult people about who will parent the child and there is also evidence that a caring and supportive family can actually reverse and change the brains of even children who have sufered severe trauma in their birth families. In other words a loved and cared for baby gets over it.

Mitigating is not the same as undoing. And genetic changes that occur due to early stress are irreversible. They can be mitigated but not erased.

Only just seen this. What appalling opinions! Given the news regarding Caroline Flack at the weekend, with people like you around, there's no wonder. These people may be in the public eye but they're fellow human beings. Nobody has the right to judge anyone. Do any of you actually know Mrs. Williams's medical situation?? How dare you be so judgemental?? BE KIND!!!!!!!!

Trisher are you honestly saying we should deliberately cause trauma to children because there might be things we can do to then reverse it. You dont think that sounds cruel.

Missieff, It doesn’t even need to be in the public eye. People in this very thread have stated that the way some information is being given is extremely hurtful. But posters keep at it.

Galaxy, yet, it’s ok to tell adult adoptees that their brain has been traumatised and isn’t normal?

Sure there is science, but to tell posters that they are damaged?

Where is the kindness in that?

"Be kind" doesnt = shut up about exploitation

If Mrs Williams (who has carried pregnancies) opted to BE a surrogate, I would probably "be kind" about that... but yet to see the privilidged rich advocates of surrogacy who claim its all about "giving gifts awwww" and not about exploiting the less well off, actually volunteering to be surrogates..

Galaxy, yet, it’s ok to tell adult adoptees that their brain has been traumatised and isn’t normal?

We're saying the COMPLETE opposote of that.
It IS "normal" for mammal infants to have a physical attatchment to their birth mother
It is normal in mammal infants for physical genetic pysiological changes to occur if separated from their birth mother in infancy.
Thats all normal
Basic. Normal. Biology

Honestly are we not allowed to say we're mammals now? Is that too "triggering"
Literally the definition of mammals is all about the "fourth trimester" (or equivalent of)

Summerlove would you prefer us to say thay adoptees arent human? Arent mammals? That the same pysiology somehow does not apply?

Is this thread about rich and poor, or is it about, as I understood it, is it about infertility? Is it about the different ways to overcome infertility, including surrogacy? That’s what I thought this thread is about.
Trisher, thank you for your sensitive and balanced contributions.
Thank you for your kind comment dorcas.

Surrogacy is often nothing to do with infertility or childlessness. Plenty of celebs who have been open about surrogacy are not infertile but did not want to "risk" a pregnancy themselves as it could leave them with complications (as pregnancies frequently do)

So outsourced the risk. By exploiting financial vulnerability.
If Im wrong, show me the rich non familial surrogates! Where are they?

Surrogacy is often used by fertile rich couples who can have their own genetic child but feel entitled to buy a womans body to gestate it, then pretend like that woman was nothing more than an incubator, and not an important part of the childs life

Also, 2 men are not "infertile" by default of being gay. Not unless they both have low sperm count/motility.

You’ve missed my point notanan. Completely.

That’s ok.

Enjoy your night.

Missiseff I agree. Truly awful. Unkind, judgmental and in some cases, downright ignorant as well.

The " be kind" thing is starting to irrite me already. What on earth has the suicide of CF and RW family and surrogacy got in common?

I'm pretty sure RW and his wife aren't going to be weeping because a few people on GN question their actions.

GN translation of ‘being kind’

1, Do not criticise my views with informed, rational arguments
2. Do not correct any factual mistakes I make
3. Allow me to misquote you and/ or change what you posted to something completely different and then launch a personal attack on what you didn’t actually say
4. Allow me to start posts with ‘ don’t take this the wrong way’ when actually we both know that’s exactly what we want you to do and how’s it’s meant
5. Allow me to say ‘judgemental’ when actually what you have done is come to a sound judgement based on evidence and rational thought
6. Allow me to start a passive aggressive thread about being kind to,posters

7. Say something apiteful and include a smiley face.

8.Alllow me to derail a serious thread when I’m losing the argument and use in so doing

Agree with the above but also think there is a sinister side to the "be kind" hashtag movement... it was widely rumoured that some of the most outspoken "be kind" hashtagging celebs had similar stories about to break on them (specifically dating teens!)

CFs "bad press" was not unjustified. She wasnt body-shamed or criticised for minor things. Journalists were questioning the suitability of a person who dated a teenager while in her 30s, was accused of DV and worse, broke her bail by sending messages to her victim, to be one of the "faces" of "family shows". Thats justified public interest journalism not "relentless hounding". The public did not want that type of institutionally protected culture in TV any more...

And it had some other "wholesome" family show celebs quaking in their boots. And IMO some unsavoury types are using her death to shut up their own victims etc and silence the press. And gullible types are re-hashtagging it as if its all about love and rainbows..

Spot on nan. In a micro way, I was also pointing out that the ‘be kind’ rubbish on GN is also about stifling informed, legitimate debate. When people want to shut you up/close you down, it’s always in their best interests.

Really what its about is the opposite of kindness.
Its about letting celebs do unkind things without consequence because now everyone is afraid of #bekind. Back to the "golden age" of celebrity

Even the journalist who wrote not a tabloid piece, but a considered interview with CF who challenged her statements about age not mattering (in relation to adults dating teens) has been forced to retract it and make a statement that she wont write things that might make celebs feel uncomfortable again. She will only write nice things now

So RW can trample and use who he likes. As he has a long history of doing to women in particular. And we all have to be kind about it....

There are still some "old boys" and girls in ITV and BBC who will use #bekind to stifle #metoo

Dont be their minions.