Researchers have created eggs from the cells of male mice, raising the prospect of male couples having their own children...

Well no of course not.
I think when money is involved you cant avoid explotation. It's why there are laws against selling kidneys etc.

Galaxy

Are people who decide not to have children targeting a group of children who would never be born, are they denying their existence. Surrogacy is illegal in many countries because of the ethical issues.

If the ethics of surrogacy could be sorted out, clear guidelines laid down in law for both the surrogates and the would be parents it could be all above board.

Uppermost should be the rights of the child and to ensure that the surrogate is not being exploited.

I was in the position of being an older mother who received tests back saying that my unborn child was highly likely to have Downs Syndrome. I could already feel my baby moving and decided to continue with the pregnancy with the full support of DH and family. I was fortunate that I delivered a healthy baby, not everyone is as lucky.

I would not like to live in a world where pregnant women are forced to continue with a pregnancy when the foetus is known to be either unlike to survive or be severely disabled, victim of rape or even failed contraception.

All sorts of things have existed forever, something existing forever doesnt give it legitimacy so to speak.

Actually forms of surrogacy have existed for ever. There are numerous stories about babies smuggled in and out of birthing rooms.

Surrogacy is banned in many countries, and paid surrogacy in many more, are you saying these countries are denying childrens right to exist.
There are reasons that removing a child from its parents is something we try not to do. I am concerned about a policy that creates that situation.

Galaxy

Are people who decide not to have children targeting a group of children who would never be born, are they denying their existence. Surrogacy is illegal in many countries because of the ethical issues.

Can you deny the existence of people who don't exist? Is what you are actually asking.

Are people who decide not to have children targeting a group of children who would never be born, are they denying their existence. Surrogacy is illegal in many countries because of the ethical issues.

The part of this scientific breakthrough which I am totally uncomfortable with is that they have artificially created an egg from male sperm/chromosomes.

This could be the beginning of a slippery road whereby humans are made for the convenience of others

I read a book many years ago whereby humans were made in a laboratory, gestated in a mechanical womb and kept alive in limbo in order to provide body parts, stem cells etc for those rich enough to pay…

If a gay male couple wish to use a surrogate they should have the same opportunities as a male/female couple where the female is unable to carry a child.

As I posted previously the above should come with a clause that the resulting child is informed and allowed to contact the surrogate if they wish to do so.

Glorianny

Children are permitted to discuss their origins and how they feel about them. Saying you would ban surrogacy is simply expressing prejudice about one group of people (in this case mostly children). It isn't just hurting someone's feelings to deny them the right to exist, it is dehumanising them And once it is done for one group of people it is easier to extend to another.

I didn't actually say surrogate children would be upset by the discussion about their existence. I said denying anyone the right to surrogacy would be discriminating against and targeting a particular group of children
The only parallel that could possibly be drawn would be if someone was proposing that all Downs syndrome children should be aborted.
Something I would certainly completely oppose but which is a logical view. If you ban one set of children from being born why not another?

This is a somewhat disconcerting development with unknown ramifications, although probably a long way from being possible with human beings. It is not equivalent to IVF which uses naturally occurring gametes to combine in an artificial environment. Presumably, this is verging on the opposite. Implantation of a fertilised ovum in the uterus is, as we all know, a vital part of the process and, as we all know, the uterus is an organ in only the female body – for now, at least.

Thanks for that link SueDonim I do remember her case but didn't remember her name. It's heart rending to read how it makes her feel. I don't see that her perception of her right to exist is any different to Glorianny's proposed surrogate children's perception if surrogacy was made harder or even illegal.

And what would happen if after the child was born the mother refused to accept the child?
Not that I'm advocating for the banning of late abortions, but if Down syndrome was not an accepted reason for a very late abortion, then if the parents rejected the baby it would be offered for adoption just like any other child. Plenty of people have adopted babies with Down syndrome.
There have been recorded cases of a surrogate baby being rejected after its birth, particularly in USA.

I would never want to go back to pre legal abortion times. There will always be abortions, the difference is whether they're safe legal ones or dangerous back street ones. But there should be a strict limit on the number of weeks unless the mother's life is in danger. To deliberately end the life of a foetus at close to term is hardly what the abortion act was supposed to be about.

I know lots of people would disagree with my views on abortion SueDonim. They are based on two things I honestly believe.
Firstly that every child should be a wanted child
Secondly that many women denied the right to a safe and legal abortion will resort to illegal and unsafe methods which have terrible consequences in some cases.

I have no doubt that some surrogacies are difficult, life is difficult.
I believe many surrogate mothers play the genetic parents' voices to the baby during their pregnancy to establish connections.

Heidi Crowter would disagree with your POV of Down’s, Glorianny. She didn’t win her case but I imagine she still holds the same view today. www.theguardian.com/society/2022/nov/25/heidi-crowter-woman-downs-syndrome-loses-court-of-appeal-abortion-law-case?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Rosie said The baby has heard that woman's voice and heartbeat for 9 months, then they're taken away from that major source of comfort.
My son’s neighbours had a surrogate baby for the wife’s sister. After the baby was born he for some months consistently turned towards his birth mother whenever he heard her voice or could seemingly scent her presence.

Sadly the surrogate mother’s marriage broke down eventually due to her husband and older children’s unhappiness at the sibling/not sibling relationship in their lives.

glorianny this is what concerns me about banning abortion in any circumstance:

Families pushed into poverty

Parents forced to raise unwanted children

Parents who are unfit raising children

It's a disaster for children

It's really another subject but I would like to know, if abortion of Downs syndrome babies was banned would women be forced to give birth to them? And what would happen if after the child was born the mother refused to accept the child?

I've always been interested in the rights of the child. Which right exactly do you think surrogacy doesn't adhere to Mollygo?

What a child with any condition knows is that their parent chose to keep them

Why is it wrong for a woman to offer to carry a child for two people who desperately want one?

Same argument as used for a kidney or other body part as they become available I suppose.

I’m still interested in the rights of the child.

Rosie51

Glorianny If you can't or won't see that society thinking it's perfectly reasonable to abort a baby solely because it will have Down syndrome gives a negative, hurtful message to a child with Down syndrome then I can't do anything about that.

Children given up for adoption, children whose mothers die in childbirth, all are in the same position as surrogate children, all are loved and cared for and thrive. while I wish that was true that all are loved and cared for and thrive, children given up for adoption or the much rarer ones whose mothers die in childbirth weren't created with the sole purpose of removing them from the woman who gestated them.

I don't think society thinks that. I think individual women can and should make their own decisions. Why is it more hurtful for Downs children to know some children with the condition are aborted, than for any child to know that some children are aborted?

Surrogate children are not "removed" from the mother at birth the mother gives the child to the genetic parents, just as a birth mother gives a child to adoptive parents.
Why is it wrong for a woman to offer to carry a child for two people who desperately want one?

You know just because we can doesn’t mean we should

VioletSky

Grannygravy

Many couples can't conceive without help

As long as the help is willing and able, no problem

Would you tell an infertile couple the must adopt because "facts" when actually there are alternate facts available?

VioletSky biology is that you need sperm and an egg along with a uterus to produce a baby human, male + female.

Some couples need help, I would never say they shouldn’t have it.

I haven’t said who can and cannot have a child, just pointed out biological facts.

Medical intervention helps many couples, a child is a gift not a right.

Glorianny If you can't or won't see that society thinking it's perfectly reasonable to abort a baby solely because it will have Down syndrome gives a negative, hurtful message to a child with Down syndrome then I can't do anything about that.

Children given up for adoption, children whose mothers die in childbirth, all are in the same position as surrogate children, all are loved and cared for and thrive. while I wish that was true that all are loved and cared for and thrive, children given up for adoption or the much rarer ones whose mothers die in childbirth weren't created with the sole purpose of removing them from the woman who gestated them.

Grannygravy

Many couples can't conceive without help

As long as the help is willing and able, no problem

Would you tell an infertile couple the must adopt because "facts" when actually there are alternate facts available?

Rosie51

Glorianny

Rosie51

Glorianny

Children are permitted to discuss their origins and how they feel about them. Saying you would ban surrogacy is simply expressing prejudice about one group of people (in this case mostly children). It isn't just hurting someone's feelings to deny them the right to exist, it is dehumanising them And once it is done for one group of people it is easier to extend to another.

You could extrapolate this to include children with Down Syndrome or any other condition considered a medical reason for abortion. That they weren't fit to be born, maybe shouldn't exist, should have been aborted along with the many others that had the same condition. Don't you think they can be hurt by that implication? Yet I think you approve of a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy, as do I.

I approve of a woman's right to choose if she wants to continue a pregnancy or not. The reason behind that decision is none of my business. I'm not advocating the abortion of all children with any condition. It is totally different to banning something which has already resulted in many much wanted and loved children.

I disagree that it is totally different, in fact I think it could be viewed as worse. You can't escape that the message given to these children is that their condition is valid grounds for denying others like them the right to life, to exist. Yes it's uncomfortable to acknowledge that you don't consider their hurt, their feelings of lack of worth, their questioning of their right to exist. I struggle to reconcile that with my support for a woman's right to choose. I still have an instinctive rejection of surrogacy. The baby has heard that woman's voice and heartbeat for 9 months, then they're taken away from that major source of comfort.

Who is giving any such message? Some women will cope with a child with Down's syndrome some women won't. Some women will cope with a child conceived by rape, some won't. The reason for any abortion is purely the business of the woman and her medical team, no one else.
No one is questioning the worth of a Downs syndrome child or their right to exist.
You seem to be creating subjects for arguments using statements that haven't been made.

I don't reject anything which has resulted in much wanted and loved children. Children who are usually not genetically related to the surrogate mother.
Children given up for adoption, children whose mothers die in childbirth, all are in the same position as surrogate children, all are loved and cared for and thrive.

VioletSky

We could say that any family should adopt rather than have their own biological children

Any family

We don't say that though

Gay couples are no different

They are different in as much as two women cannot procreate without sperm and two men cannot procreate without an egg and a female to carry the baby and give birth.

Not an opinion just biological facts…