Surrogate refuses abortion - Page 7
+ Reply to Thread
Page 7 of 13 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 128
Like Tree60Likes

Thread: Surrogate refuses abortion

  1. #61
    Posting Addict GloriaInTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    7,597

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Potter75 View Post
    Ah, well! If that is your logic your hero the surrogate ought to have had the child be dead to HER when she signed a contract saying that she would abort the child before she even became impregnated with it! OR again, the child should have been dead to her and she ought to have NO rights to make a decision about its life when she offered to kill it for $15,000, and the childs biological parents ought to have been able to then make the decisions of the child's life at that point.

    Tricky, eh? What of your hero now?
    Doesn't make any difference to me. As I already stated once, it is a lot easier to say what you will do on paper than when you are actually faced with a situation that you thought would never happen and asked to kill a child. And she already also stated that even if they had agreed to the $15,000 she wouldn't have gone through with it, which she proved by not getting ANY money and spending her OWN money to give birth to the baby.

    Words mean nothing it is actions that count.
    Mom to Lee, Jake, Brandon, Rocco
    Stepmom to Ryan, Regan, Braden, Baley
    Granddaughters Kylie 10/18/2010 & Aleya 4/22/2013


    I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosopy, as a cause for withdrawing from a friend. --Thomas Jefferson

  2. #62
    Posting Addict
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    14,461

    Default

    Can you prove that? I'm assuming that a pro life association, the state, or the adoptive parents paid for the birth, since this woman HAD no money. Please cite your assertion.

    And I actually agree with you. It is one thing to say something and another to do it. Which is why I find it so INCREDIBLY unfair that you are willing to forgive the surrogate for wanting to kill the child but not the birth parents. Why did SHE get a second chance, but not them? When they decided that they wanted to be parents why do you think that its fine that this horrible surrogate could just kidnap their child away and give it to strangers?
    bunnyfufu likes this.

  3. #63
    Posting Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    7,263

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GloriaInTX View Post
    Doesn't make any difference to me. As I already stated once, it is a lot easier to say what you will do on paper than when you are actually faced with a situation that you thought would never happen and asked to kill a child. And she already also stated that even if they had agreed to the $15,000 she wouldn't have gone through with it, which she proved by not getting ANY money and spending her OWN money to give birth to the baby.

    Words mean nothing it is actions that count.
    This was not her child. So you really think this was an easy decision for them to make? Their attachment was much stronger to their baby than the surrogate mother's. The surrogate mother went into the contract knowing she would never be the one to raise the child.

    Let's say I decided to be a surrogate for my sister and BIL. Fairly early on it is clear, if born the child will live maybe days or maybe months. Most babies born with the diseases die by 12 months. All three of us have some soul searching to do. Should my sister and BIL come to the conclusion that - for them- the most compassionate thing to do is terminate the pregnancy, is it really ethical of me to force then to bring this child into the world so they can watch her suffer for her short life? And then start the grieving process instead of celebrating a 1st birthday?

    What dog do I have in the fight? I'm not the one that will raise this child. There would already be a certain detachment because all I would be is the surrogate.

    (I know my sister and BIL is not the best examlple because I would be the baby's niece but it is still a valid point with any couple for whom I would be a surrogate.)
    Potter75 likes this.

  4. #64
    Posting Addict GloriaInTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    7,597

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Potter75 View Post
    Can you prove that? I'm assuming that a pro life association, the state, or the adoptive parents paid for the birth, since this woman HAD no money. Please cite your assertion.

    And I actually agree with you. It is one thing to say something and another to do it. Which is why I find it so INCREDIBLY unfair that you are willing to forgive the surrogate for wanting to kill the child but not the birth parents. Why did SHE get a second chance, but not them? When they decided that they wanted to be parents why do you think that its fine that this horrible surrogate could just kidnap their child away and give it to strangers?
    They never asked for a second chance. They still didn't want the baby. They never decided they wanted to be the parents, they only wanted to control where the child went. They wanted the state to take control of the baby instead of adoptive parents.

    And even if the actual medical expenses of the birth were covered by the state, she was still out the cost of moving to another state and her living expenses.

    A lawyer acting for Kelley, Michael DePrimo, said that while the intended parents could not legally compel her to have an abortion, they planned to put the child up for foster care as a ward of the state. As legal parents - under Connecticut law the genetic parents are considered the legal parents - the intended parents would seemingly be permitted to do so.
    Last edited by GloriaInTX; 03-11-2013 at 01:59 PM.
    Mom to Lee, Jake, Brandon, Rocco
    Stepmom to Ryan, Regan, Braden, Baley
    Granddaughters Kylie 10/18/2010 & Aleya 4/22/2013


    I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosopy, as a cause for withdrawing from a friend. --Thomas Jefferson

  5. #65
    Community Host
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    13,538

    Default

    Gloria - I am against abortion in almost every situation and would never advocate for an abortion, however, she signed a contract stating that she would get an abortion if the couple choice to do so. Someone who was against really against abortion IMO would never have signed such a contract in the first place. This leads me to believe that it was not about a deep objection to abortion, but about money or because she became attached to the baby. If you sign away your body, you loose the right to make decisions about your body. I believe there are very good reasons that the practice is illegal in some States.

    ~Bonita~

  6. #66
    Posting Addict
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    14,461

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GloriaInTX View Post
    They never asked for a second chance. They still didn't want the baby. They never decided they wanted to be the parents, they only wanted to control where the child went. They wanted the state to take control of the baby instead of adoptive parents.
    Who the heck are you to say that that decision isn't theirs to make!!! TONS of parents with horribly sick children make that decision, and its a valid one, especially with three other children at home. Not all people are willing to be martyrs like your sister or whomever you mentioned, and it is not your business or right to judge the decision these parents had every right to make. This surrogate STOLE their child and their decision away from them. I won't even have a dog in the family because I don't want to have to deal with the death of a much loved thing ~ to bring a baby who is going to die in childhood into a family is NOT an easy decision. I support each family having the right to deal with that as they choose. If foster care nearby is the right decision for a family I allow them to make it without judgment. I do not think that because that is what this family chose it makes it just dandy super for someone to steal their child and give it away to the highest bidder! That is gross!

  7. #67
    Posting Addict GloriaInTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    7,597

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AlyssaEimers View Post
    Gloria - I am against abortion in almost every situation and would never advocate for an abortion, however, she signed a contract stating that she would get an abortion if the couple choice to do so. Someone who was against really against abortion IMO would never have signed such a contract in the first place. This leads me to believe that it was not about a deep objection to abortion, but about money or because she became attached to the baby. If you sign away your body, you loose the right to make decisions about your body. I believe there are very good reasons that the practice is illegal in some States.
    So you don't think that a woman could say she would abort on paper then change her mind when the actual child she would have to kill is alive and kicking inside her? And also from what I understand the wording in the contract it didn't specify exactly what serious defects or abnormalities meant so that was up for interpretation and they clearly disagreed about what that meant.
    Mom to Lee, Jake, Brandon, Rocco
    Stepmom to Ryan, Regan, Braden, Baley
    Granddaughters Kylie 10/18/2010 & Aleya 4/22/2013


    I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosopy, as a cause for withdrawing from a friend. --Thomas Jefferson

  8. #68
    Posting Addict
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    14,461

    Default

    You don't think that a child who is going to die before age 10 and who has a serious chance of dying in her first year and has already undergone several invasive surgeries would be considered to have "serious defects"? C'mon now. A cleft palate is NOT a serious defect. SERIOUS heart AND brain defects. Yes. Problems. Now, were it my child I would have it. That is a decision my husband and I made each time we were pregnant, we didn't even do prenatal testing (other than the 20 week ultrasound) because of how strongly we felt about that. For US. I won't make that decision for any other family, however, and I'm not going to pretend to be stupid about what any normal person would consider to be a "serious" health defect.

  9. #69
    Posting Addict GloriaInTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    7,597

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Potter75 View Post
    You don't think that a child who is going to die before age 10 and who has a serious chance of dying in her first year and has already undergone several invasive surgeries would be considered to have "serious defects"? C'mon now. A cleft palate is NOT a serious defect. SERIOUS heart AND brain defects. Yes. Problems. Now, were it my child I would have it. That is a decision my husband and I made each time we were pregnant, we didn't even do prenatal testing (other than the 20 week ultrasound) because of how strongly we felt about that. For US. I won't make that decision for any other family, however, and I'm not going to pretend to be stupid about what any normal person would consider to be a "serious" health defect.
    As you yourself pointed out they didn't know about all of that until after she was born.

    the baby had a cleft lip and palate, she had a cyst in her brain and also suffered from several serious heart defects
    This is all they knew before she was born. None of those things are incompatible with life.
    Mom to Lee, Jake, Brandon, Rocco
    Stepmom to Ryan, Regan, Braden, Baley
    Granddaughters Kylie 10/18/2010 & Aleya 4/22/2013


    I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosopy, as a cause for withdrawing from a friend. --Thomas Jefferson

  10. #70
    Posting Addict
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    14,461

    Default

    They actually used the word "serious" in what you quoted. Are you still questioning if the defects were serious? And the contract didn't stipulate abortion if the defects made the fetus incompatible with life. In fact, wouldn't that by default make abortion a moot point? In other words, the fetus would die?

+ Reply to Thread
Page 7 of 13 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
v -->

About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Sitemap | Terms & Conditions