In which the Romneys contract for a convenient abortion

[gustava]

Why didn't Tagg's wife also sign the contract?

[MonkeyMomma]

An interesting comparison. I'm inclined to think that surrogates shouldn't have that right, but just because if I was that biological parent I'd be pretty fucking pissed off if the surrogate changed her mind and aborted my baby. But of course, that's an opinion based on emotion and not on her rights as a woman.

I suppose it could also go the other way, couldn't it? A biological parent who wanted to abort the baby and the surrogate didn't want to go through with it. According to the contract quoted in the OP, the biological parents apparently have the legal right to force her into it? How would that even work?

Surrogacy gets so messy, for me anyway, in my head. I used to think it was something I would like to do for someone. Not anymore. But you've given me good food for thought as I lie in bed tonight.

This happened in a Facebook group I belong to - a woman was serving as a surrogate, they found out there were markers for Down Syndrome, the bio parents wanted to terminate, and the surrogate refused. There was, if I remember, a pretty messy legal battle, that ended with the surrogate giving birth and the baby being placed with another family.

And that was when I decided that I would probably never walk down that road.

[greek_chorus]

I read this article last month in Huffington Post and there's a sentence before the section the OP quoted:

“If in the opinion of the treating physician or her independent obstetrician there is potential physical harm to the surrogate, the decision to abort or not abort is to be made by the surrogate. … In the event the child is determined to be physiologically, genetically or chromosomally abnormal, the decision to abort or not to abort is to be made by the intended parents. In such a case the surrogate agrees to abort, or not to abort, in accordance with the intended parents’ decision.â€

So it seems the surrogate does have some choice when it comes to her health. TMZ's "source" seems to make it clear that if the Romney's chose abortion the surrogate would have to agree, but it would be curious and tragic to see how that would actually play out in a court of law if the surrogate refused. My non-lawyerly guess is that surrogate would be allowed to continue with the pregnancy but that the intended parents would not be obligated for any financial issues related to her care or the child's birth and would probably receive money to offset any financial damages on their end.

[2xx1xy1JD]

I've got some issues with the article itself.

1. No surrogacy contract in the United States can actually prevent a surrogate from aborting or force a surrogate to abort. The article was misleading. The contract can only set out the intentions of the parties, and financial consequences. Generally, a surrogate would still be paid if the abortion was needed to save her life or was requested by the Intended Parents, but would not be paid in full if she aborted without consent. Similarly, if the Intended Parents wished to abort due to severe fetal abnormalities and the surrogate did not agree, they may not be responsible for paying her to continue the pregnancy.

2. There's no evidence that the contract said that the Intended Parents would choose to abort. It just leaves the decision in their hands.

3. Mitt may have assisted with the cost, but does the grandfather-to-be really get a say in the nitty-gritty details? It was the son, not Mitt, who was a party to the contract.

4. I have issues in general with using extremely private details (and pregnancy plans are certainly private) of the lives of family members to score political points. Yes, I understand that Mitt has recently decided to run on a pro-life platform, so he would like private decisions to be subject to government approval. I see the point of showing the irony/hypocracy, but at the same time, want to maintain that these are private matters that shouldn't be anyone else's business.

[Arete]

I would normally respect keeping a candidate's family medical details private, but no way, no how, will I give a pass here. Mitt is running on a prolife platform and if elected will start moving along legislation to restrict abortion. I do not believe for a New York minute that Mitt's kid would not wish to exercise his right to have a "defective" pregnancy aborted if testing showed their was issues. That's why he was fine with that being in the contract. They wanted a perfect baby, and it isn't like that in and of itself is a crime. When your father wants to take away the rights of other people to make those decisions for their pregnancies, it is, at the very least, a great hypocrisy. There rich and get one set of rules, the rest of us will get whatever set of rules Mitt's backers think their God commands. No, just, no. I'm willing to expose the Romney hypocrisy in every news outlet available to ensure the man doesn't get elected. These private matters become our collective business when the candidate has no issue intruding into our business.

[lilwriter85]

This is a bit OT, but I found this article about Mitt's days as an LDS bishop in which one of his ward members had to get an abortion for a medical reason and Mitt tried to block it.

http://jezebel.com/5851050/the-curious- ... ushkus-mom

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/geoffrey- ... 56568.html

[gustava]

I would normally respect keeping a candidate's family medical details private, but no way, no how, will I give a pass here. Mitt is running on a prolife platform and if elected will start moving along legislation to restrict abortion. I do not believe for a New York minute that Mitt's kid would not wish to exercise his right to have a "defective" pregnancy aborted if testing showed their was issues. That's why he was fine with that being in the contract. They wanted a perfect baby, and it isn't like that in and of itself is a crime. When your father wants to take away the rights of other people to make those decisions for their pregnancies, it is, at the very least, a great hypocrisy. There rich and get one set of rules, the rest of us will get whatever set of rules Mitt's backers think their God commands. No, just, no. I'm willing to expose the Romney hypocrisy in every news outlet available to ensure the man doesn't get elected. These private matters become our collective business when the candidate has no issue intruding into our business.

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: