Sparkling Adventures in Child Neglect - "Gayby" is Born!

[So Many Lies]

I think she had it right -- let me see if I can put it all in once place.

Sæþór Benjamín Randalsson, born Ben Mathis to a pastor and his wife who now work in West Point, VA, is the enthusiastic one. He is the taller one, with the toothy grin, the not-red hair, and the "poopinmymouth" blog (as well as lots of other online presence, sometimes as BenChompers). He is the one in the tub, looking so moved, in the post-birth pictures.

Ágúst Karlsson is the redhead who often wears glasses, a native of Iceland, who was described as less enthused about being a parent (on the Gayby blog? someone correct me if I'm wrong). Ágúst is the biological father (as I remember, they wanted a double dose of Possible Redhead as well as wanting to get him invested - again, someone correct me if I'm wrong).

Ágúst is the one whose Facebook said he was in Ben's family's hometown. That's why it piqued my curiosity.

BTW, if anyone has trouble remembering who is the less enthused (and the bio dad), visualize this picture:

There is it -- Ágúst squeezed in a sandwich of grinning, high-enthusiasm sparkly ones, probably thinking "great -- this makes me look like Lucky Pierre in a very overdressed threesome reach-around."

Although, as I've said, I do have some hope that the low-key look is just Ágúst's natural way, and that he's not that into having his picture taken. I sometimes want to caption every pic I've seen of him -- what's the Icelandic for "Ben, are you taking my picture again?!"

You're completely right. It was me who had it wrong. I didn't mean my comment to sound rude, either. I actually thought I was clear on the ins & outs.

The pic is a good visual reminder of the situation.

[thoughtful]

You're completely right. It was me who had it wrong. I didn't mean my comment to sound rude, either. I actually thought I was clear on the ins & outs.

I don't think you sounded rude. In fact, I picked your post to answer somewhat at random, since there are others who have reversed various facts about the Dads.

So, I went back and made sure of the details, because remembering what name goes with what face, history and facts is definitely not my strong suit, IRL and on FJ.

[flubber]

I think she had it right -- let me see if I can put it all in once place.

Sæþór Benjamín Randalsson, born Ben Mathis to a pastor and his wife who now work in West Point, VA, is the enthusiastic one. He is the taller one, with the toothy grin, the not-red hair, and the "poopinmymouth" blog (as well as lots of other online presence, sometimes as BenChompers). He is the one in the tub, looking so moved, in the post-birth pictures.

Ágúst Karlsson is the redhead who often wears glasses, a native of Iceland, who was described as less enthused about being a parent (on the Gayby blog? someone correct me if I'm wrong). Ágúst is the biological father (as I remember, they wanted a double dose of Possible Redhead as well as wanting to get him invested - again, someone correct me if I'm wrong).

Ágúst is the one whose Facebook said he was in Ben's family's hometown. That's why it piqued my curiosity.

BTW, if anyone has trouble remembering who is the less enthused (and the bio dad), visualize this picture:

There is it -- Ágúst squeezed in a sandwich of grinning, high-enthusiasm sparkly ones, probably thinking "great -- this makes me look like Lucky Pierre in a very overdressed threesome reach-around."

Although, as I've said, I do have some hope that the low-key look is just Ágúst's natural way, and that he's not that into having his picture taken. I sometimes want to caption every pic I've seen of him -- what's the Icelandic for "Ben, are you taking my picture again?!"

Thanks for that, I could never work out who was who. And yes it seems odd that Ágúst would be travelling to see ben's parents.

I don't believe any of the adults have the right to determine that the siblings have no contact, they have a right to know each other - they are siblings after all. I don't believe Lauren went into this with the understanding there would be no contact (as posted about) and hopefully for the sake of all the children the dad's didn't mislead her with this.

{L_MESSAGE_HIDDEN}:

On Tsu she keeps talking about not getting the 'baby blues' yet. This irks me, she knows full well that the 'baby blues' are a completely different thing to the PND - the black dog. I hope she is 'self-aware' enough to realise she needs help if she gets PND and seeks it out

[BeaSnarky]

I applaud you. It's right. This is the only moral and logical stance to take. Surrogacy is NOT right and contrary to everything we know to be right about pre birth bonding and identity.

There are many things I would like in life but I can't have them. I'm not going to use another person's body to procure them either.

My only arguement here is my own. I want to be a parent. In a hole in my heart, weepy every night, can't look at other pregnant women kind of way. But I can't, even though I am a woman, because due to a hysterectomy, I am not able to conceive or carry a child. My husband and I have considered surrogacy using a donor egg. We have also considered adoption.

In either case, I would need to use someone else's body to have a child. Period.

What then, is your argument between surrogacy and adoption there?

Do I have no right to a child whatsoever because I would have to use someone else's body to have one? Even if I adopted an older child or toddler? Because they would have had to have born to someone else if I want to adopt them.

Arguments like that are hurtful to the infertile. Very hurtful.

[julie paradox]

OMG, Lauren in the threesome pic looks SO like my sister!

(She doesn't normally. I think it's the smile.)

And Ágúst's expression makes him look like another sister's husband. This is weird.

[shedemei]

My take on this thread: there is no one right way to handle adoption or surrogacy. Success or failure depends on individual people and how they handle the situation. What seems eight at first may turn out to be wrong later, or not.

I'm not convinced that the way Lauren claims to be handling the situation is wrong or doomed to failure, despite my thinking that being a surrogate was probably not a good choice for her and her family.

[Mama Mia]

My only arguement here is my own. I want to be a parent. In a hole in my heart, weepy every night, can't look at other pregnant women kind of way. But I can't, even though I am a woman, because due to a hysterectomy, I am not able to conceive or carry a child. My husband and I have considered surrogacy using a donor egg. We have also considered adoption.

In either case, I would need to use someone else's body to have a child. Period.

What then, is your argument between surrogacy and adoption there?

Do I have no right to a child whatsoever because I would have to use someone else's body to have one? Even if I adopted an older child or toddler? Because they would have had to have born to someone else if I want to adopt them.

Arguments like that are hurtful to the infertile. Very hurtful.

I'm really sorry that you are in this situation, I can't imagine how painful it must be.

I'm wondering if you've looked into sibling group adoption through the foster care system? I think there are some real benefits to sibling group adoptions --- not just for the perspective parents, but for the children, and their families.

For the children, there is the obvious bond and connection and shared history that they already have. They won't need to feel like no one in the world " gets" them - because their brother(s) and/or sister(s) are right there. Siblings in foster care often have exceptionally strong bonds , for obvious reasons.

There are some other reasons why adopting sibling groups can be good --- the extended family of one abused/neglected/abandoned/unable to be cared for child may be able to pull together and raise that one child if the parents can't or won't. It's much more difficult, and can often be beyond the capacity of grandparents, aunts, uncles etc. to raise multiple children, no matter how much they may wish they could.

Also, frankly, if the biological parents have had multiple children removed, and their rights terminated, it's more likely that the parents have the kind of serious issues that make actually raising the children themselves unrealistic and/or dangerous. It is less likely that it will be a single mom with an infant who just became overwhelmed/hooked up with the wrong guy/had a breakdown and then pulls herself together and regrets giving up her child or not following through with her CPS plan.

Some suggestions I would give if you do look into adoption of a sibling group through foster care:

1) If your focus is on adoption and a permanent home -- make 100% certain that all of the children are actually available for adoption and that all parental rights have been terminated. It isn't unusual for toddler sister to be completely adoptable, while pre-school brothers dad is still trying to work towards reunification. Or that oldest sisters Dad was never even notified. Ask to see paperwork. Have a lawyer with experience in this area look at the paperwork.

2) Recognize and include the children's extended family if that is what they want. Even if the Aunt is loud and rails on about opinions you vehemently disagree with, or Grandma chain smokes. Don't act superior or judgey about them. Obviously you want the kids safe. But keeping their family as part of their family is really important for everyone ( if they want it).

This includes the biological parents. Just be sure to try to not build up expectations if it's likely the child will be disappointed. There are few things sadder than watching the face of a child who is waiting for mom to come visit--when mom never, ever shows. If there are serious safety concerns, of course visits. may not be feasible.

Remember that " extended family" will often include official or unofficial step-siblings, or their step-siblings siblings ( why on earth is there no name for that relationship??) .

3) often the sibling groups that are available include 3+ children. If you are open to more than 2 children go spend time, a lot of time, around groups of kids. Borrow your friends kids, lots of them. Of varying ages. All at once. Go do daily activities with all these kids. Practice taking 3 kids to the grocery store or park or making dinner while a toddler pitches a fit, two pre-schoolers are trying to kill each other and the 7 year old is trying to do homework. Really test it out. People who can nicely raise and nurture two sweet little girls -- might completely fall apart when you add a third. Make sure ( well as much as you can be when it's not 24/7) , that you can manage multiple kids.

4) recognize these kids will already have a history and roles in place. Try to work with that. In addition to whatever traumas led to the placement in foster are, there are their own dynamics to work with. One child is probably incredibly parentified and protective of his/her siblings. You coming in and taking over and taking charge might not seem like a relief to this child. It might be devestating. Reassure her by asking her advice on how to care for and comfort the littler kids -----even if she's 6.

Just some thoughts

[So Many Lies]

My only arguement here is my own. I want to be a parent. In a hole in my heart, weepy every night, can't look at other pregnant women kind of way. But I can't, even though I am a woman, because due to a hysterectomy, I am not able to conceive or carry a child. My husband and I have considered surrogacy using a donor egg. We have also considered adoption.

In either case, I would need to use someone else's body to have a child. Period.

What then, is your argument between surrogacy and adoption there?

Do I have no right to a child whatsoever because I would have to use someone else's body to have one? Even if I adopted an older child or toddler? Because they would have had to have born to someone else if I want to adopt them.

Arguments like that are hurtful to the infertile. Very hurtful.

My position doesn't change. I don't have a problem with the adoption of unwanted children in the world already created. Nothing can be done now to prevent their coming into being. Taking care of those children is extremely important.

I'm sorry if it's hurtful.

Unfortunately we all have things in life we can't have. We all have hardships.

If I need a kidney I'm not going to pay someone in the third world to give me one. Or an unstable woman with a martyr complex and mental health issues. No Way.

[Mama Mia]

Unfortunately we all have things in life we can't have. We all have hardships.

If I need a kidney I'm not going to pay someone in the third world to give me one. Or an unstable woman with a martyr complex and mental health issues. No Way.

Would you take a kidney from a living donor if it was a friend or family member? I'm not quite understanding what the analogy is? Is it okay ( to you) to utilize the services of a surrogate as long as the surrogate is doing it solely because they have a connection to the couple trying to have a child? But not if it's a stranger for profit? I'm not sure where you are going with this :think:

I think the pay for organs issue is very complicated. On the one hand it is, obviously, incredibly horrible, unfair, dangerous, a sign the world is evil and so on.... But on the other hand -- if it's saving someone's family from starving and greatly improving their long term stability and options - isn't it kind of elitist to tell people they can't? I mean, truthfully, I'm not out there working everyday to change the deplorable conditions in their tiny speck of the world - so do I have the right to judge from my little tiny speck?

[heidi]

My only arguement here is my own. I want to be a parent. In a hole in my heart, weepy every night, can't look at other pregnant women kind of way. But I can't, even though I am a woman, because due to a hysterectomy, I am not able to conceive or carry a child. My husband and I have considered surrogacy using a donor egg. We have also considered adoption.

In either case, I would need to use someone else's body to have a child. Period.

What then, is your argument between surrogacy and adoption there?

Do I have no right to a child whatsoever because I would have to use someone else's body to have one? Even if I adopted an older child or toddler? Because they would have had to have born to someone else if I want to adopt them.

Arguments like that are hurtful to the infertile. Very hurtful.

I think that if you pursue adoption/surrogacy you need to be mindful of the child in the situation. Adoption isn't something bad, it just comes with it's own set of issues that tend to get swept under the rug, dismissed or ignored. I'm very, very thankful to be a part of my (adoptive)family. Like I said earlier, if I could have changed one thing about my life it would be that I had been born into that family instead of adopted because being an adoptee is painful.

I'm very grateful that my parents and especially my mom (who also suffered from infertility like you) fully supported my search for my biological family. Ten years removed from my search I can say that it took my (adoptive)mom a lot of bravery and emotional courage to help me look and to sit beside me when I met my (biological)mother. She did that because she (and my dad) put me first--not their infertility. They never looked at me as the answer to their infertility (which, in a sense I was) but as their daughter, a person. My feelings and security were more important to them than their grief/loss/angry surrounding infertility. I'm a very lucky adoptee in that regard, many adoptees are not so lucky.

[jaelh]

nt.

[jaelh]

I'm very grateful that my parents and especially my mom (who also suffered from infertility like you) fully supported my search for my biological family. Ten years removed from my search I can say that it took my (adoptive)mom a lot of bravery and emotional courage to help me look and to sit beside me when I met my (biological)mother. She did that because she (and my dad) put me first--not their infertility. They never looked at me as the answer to their infertility (which, in a sense I was) but as their daughter, a person. My feelings and security were more important to them than their grief/loss/angry surrounding infertility. I'm a very lucky adoptee in that regard, many adoptees are not so lucky.

They sound like wonderful parents, Heidi.

[August]

Heidi, I think that for most thoughtful, caring people it immediately becomes all about the child the momentyou gave them, whether you were unassisted, third party or adopting. Narcissistic assholes come with functional ovaries, too (case in point, Sparkles).

There was a blogger a while ago who adopted internationally,partly to have a 'clean' claim to the child. She did a complete aboutface and did a birthmother search in Kazakhstan.

[DaffyDill]

I sincerely hope the girls are going to come through this experience OK, but seeing their mother isn't exactly renowned for putting her children first, it's certainly looking unlikely. IMHO,we don't really know enough about the dads to judge them - apart from a few ill-advised internet posts/presence e.g. "Gold Star" gays, and Ben's "poopinmymouth" site name. Certainly, they both looked emotionally invested at the birth, and appear to have the financial means to provide for little Daniel, so at this point I'm happy for them that they have been able to start a family together. Obviously their choice of surrogate leaves a lot to be desired, however desperation can lead to some poor decisions I am sure.

{L_MESSAGE_HIDDEN}:

Lauren is claiming on her tsu blog that she had PND after Elijah's birth for about a month, then self diagnosed herself and combatted it - I don't think she explained how....downed a bottle of sparkly glitter perhaps, who knows? Isn't she amazing? :roll: So sparkly and obviously a superior being to all those unsparkly hospital birthing women who need professional help with their PND and are smart and intelligent enough to seek it out. She also may have been reading here because she has a slight dig at "people waiting for her to fall" and people who think she is mentally unstable.

[So Many Lies]

Would you take a kidney from a living donor if it was a friend or family member? I'm not quite understanding what the analogy is? Is it okay ( to you) to utilize the services of a surrogate as long as the surrogate is doing it solely because they have a connection to the couple trying to have a child? But not if it's a stranger for profit? I'm not sure where you are going with this :think:

I think the pay for organs issue is very complicated. On the one hand it is, obviously, incredibly horrible, unfair, dangerous, a sign the world is evil and so on.... But on the other hand -- if it's saving someone's family from starving and greatly improving their long term stability and options - isn't it kind of elitist to tell people they can't? I mean, truthfully, I'm not out there working everyday to change the deplorable conditions in their tiny speck of the world - so do I have the right to judge from my little tiny speck?

The organ trade and developing world surrogacy are two sides if the same coin.

I'm not going to buy something from a person that would not otherwise be for sale had the person not been poor or desperate. That's exploitation!

If giving money helps them and makes me feel good then there is a multitude of beneficial non exploitative ways I can do that. I need not resort to treating a fellow human as my handmaiden.

Would I exploit a family member by taking a kidney or renting their womb? Nope. If a family member wanted to give me a kidney I'd consider it a lesser of two evils. But would I use my sister to conceive a child even if she felt she could handle it? No.

It does parallel with Lauren in the sense that had Her husband not gone insane (or indeed that Lauren had had a different upbringing) she wouldn't be doing all these bizarre things.

[So Many Lies]

Heidi, I think that for most thoughtful, caring people it immediately becomes all about the child the momentyou gave them, whether you were unassisted, third party or adopting. Narcissistic assholes come with functional ovaries, too (case in point, Sparkles).

There was a blogger a while ago who adopted internationally,partly to have a 'clean' claim to the child. She did a complete aboutface and did a birthmother search in Kazakhstan.

A mature turnaround for that women which is very admirable.

[Antimony]

The organ trade and developing world surrogacy are two sides if the same coin.

I'm not going to buy something from a person that would not otherwise be for sale had the person not been poor or desperate. That's exploitation!

If giving money helps them and makes me feel good then there is a multitude of beneficial non exploitative ways I can do that. I need not resort to treating a fellow human as my handmaiden.

Would I exploit a family member by taking a kidney or renting their womb? Nope. If a family member wanted to give me a kidney I'd consider it a lesser of two evils. But would I use my sister to conceive a child even if she felt she could handle it? No.

It does parallel with Lauren in the sense that had Her husband not gone insane (or indeed that Lauren had had a different upbringing) she wouldn't be doing all these bizarre things.

Okay, so organs and children are clearly very large ideas and in the lattee case, children, but I'm curious if you feel the same about semen, egg and blood plasma donation. These are all bodily tissues, some of them reproductive material, and people certainly sell them for smaller cash amounts to make ends meet. Egg donation is the trickier one but my understanding is that in many cases, so called compensation is equivalent to payment.

I am also sort of scared of getting ripped apart here but my best friend is infertile. She wants her own genetic children. I am fertile but do not want children. We're both years away from this discussion in full but we have talked about it and she understands that if she wants a child, she has a friend who truly wants to consider this option and who would not expect traditional payment, who is open to a relationship with said hypothetical child that is not primary parent, who will always be in contact, but won't be genetically related, and a surrogate she isn't financially taking advantage of. Now, while we don't know or even think this is a sure or easy thing, I know that I love her that much and we would expect a lot of counseling beforehand to see if we are truly suitable but clearly this type of surrogacy is world's away from Laure s practice of finding a random couple on the internets and declaring a love affair.

Additionally, there's the sex flipped side to this - two lesbians wanting to have a child are going to need at least some sperm and while sperm banks are common, sometimes donors are close personal friends that maintain non primary parent roles in the children's lives or don't maintain a role at all. This comes with another can of worms, I'm sure.

I am learning a lot on this thread though I do disagree that a person needs to know their biological parent at arms length. At least in my case, contact, reminders, etc of my biological parent habe never done me good and while I have a genetic half brother, we really can't make any connection work no matter how we try. Biological enough but we continually just fall flat as far as a sibling relationship. I don't know why that is because on the other side of the coin, my stepfather mother is as far as I'm concerned, my grandmother and I'm not genetically linked to them at all. But me, eh, I've always been a blood of the covenant kind of gal, so hell if I know.

[Coco]

I'm really sorry that you are in this situation, I can't imagine how painful it must be.

I'm wondering if you've looked into sibling group adoption through the foster care system? I think there are some real benefits to sibling group adoptions --- not just for the perspective parents, but for the children, and their families.

For the children, there is the obvious bond and connection and shared history that they already have. They won't need to feel like no one in the world " gets" them - because their brother(s) and/or sister(s) are right there. Siblings in foster care often have exceptionally strong bonds , for obvious reasons.

There are some other reasons why adopting sibling groups can be good --- the extended family of one abused/neglected/abandoned/unable to be cared for child may be able to pull together and raise that one child if the parents can't or won't. It's much more difficult, and can often be beyond the capacity of grandparents, aunts, uncles etc. to raise multiple children, no matter how much they may wish they could.

Also, frankly, if the biological parents have had multiple children removed, and their rights terminated, it's more likely that the parents have the kind of serious issues that make actually raising the children themselves unrealistic and/or dangerous. It is less likely that it will be a single mom with an infant who just became overwhelmed/hooked up with the wrong guy/had a breakdown and then pulls herself together and regrets giving up her child or not following through with her CPS plan.

Some suggestions I would give if you do look into adoption of a sibling group through foster care:

1) If your focus is on adoption and a permanent home -- make 100% certain that all of the children are actually available for adoption and that all parental rights have been terminated. It isn't unusual for toddler sister to be completely adoptable, while pre-school brothers dad is still trying to work towards reunification. Or that oldest sisters Dad was never even notified. Ask to see paperwork. Have a lawyer with experience in this area look at the paperwork.

2) Recognize and include the children's extended family if that is what they want. Even if the Aunt is loud and rails on about opinions you vehemently disagree with, or Grandma chain smokes. Don't act superior or judgey about them. Obviously you want the kids safe. But keeping their family as part of their family is really important for everyone ( if they want it).

This includes the biological parents. Just be sure to try to not build up expectations if it's likely the child will be disappointed. There are few things sadder than watching the face of a child who is waiting for mom to come visit--when mom never, ever shows. If there are serious safety concerns, of course visits. may not be feasible.

Remember that " extended family" will often include official or unofficial step-siblings, or their step-siblings siblings ( why on earth is there no name for that relationship??) .

3) often the sibling groups that are available include 3+ children. If you are open to more than 2 children go spend time, a lot of time, around groups of kids. Borrow your friends kids, lots of them. Of varying ages. All at once. Go do daily activities with all these kids. Practice taking 3 kids to the grocery store or park or making dinner while a toddler pitches a fit, two pre-schoolers are trying to kill each other and the 7 year old is trying to do homework. Really test it out. People who can nicely raise and nurture two sweet little girls -- might completely fall apart when you add a third. Make sure ( well as much as you can be when it's not 24/7) , that you can manage multiple kids.

4) recognize these kids will already have a history and roles in place. Try to work with that. In addition to whatever traumas led to the placement in foster are, there are their own dynamics to work with. One child is probably incredibly parentified and protective of his/her siblings. You coming in and taking over and taking charge might not seem like a relief to this child. It might be devestating. Reassure her by asking her advice on how to care for and comfort the littler kids -----even if she's 6.

Just some thoughts

wow, that is real ministry. That is real love. Honestly don't think i could ever be strong enough or selfless enough to do it. :worship: to the amazing families who are already or will be providing that structure and shelter for groups of siblings.

[Mama Mia]

Okay, so organs and children are clearly very large ideas and in the lattee case, children, but I'm curious if you feel the same about semen, egg and blood plasma donation. These are all bodily tissues, some of them reproductive material, and people certainly sell them for smaller cash amounts to make ends meet. Egg donation is the trickier one but my understanding is that in many cases, so called compensation is equivalent to payment.

I am also sort of scared of getting ripped apart here but my best friend is infertile. She wants her own genetic children. I am fertile but do not want children. We're both years away from this discussion in full but we have talked about it and she understands that if she wants a child, she has a friend who truly wants to consider this option and who would not expect traditional payment, who is open to a relationship with said hypothetical child that is not primary parent, who will always be in contact, but won't be genetically related, and a surrogate she isn't financially taking advantage of. Now, while we don't know or even think this is a sure or easy thing, I know that I love her that much and we would expect a lot of counseling beforehand to see if we are truly suitable but clearly this type of surrogacy is world's away from Laure s practice of finding a random couple on the internets and declaring a love affair.

My sister had a little but of trouble getting and staying pregnant. I told her I would definitely carry a child for her if it turned out she needed that kind of help. I'm sure it would have been very, very difficult sometimes, for everyone. From issues like explaining to my own children, to if I thought she was making bad parenting choices. But I don't think any of them would have been insurmountable.

Additionally, there's the sex flipped side to this - two lesbians wanting to have a child are going to need at least some sperm and while sperm banks are common, sometimes donors are close personal friends that maintain non primary parent roles in the children's lives or don't maintain a role at all. This comes with another can of worms, I'm sure.

I am learning a lot on this thread though I do disagree that a person needs to know their biological parent at arms length. At least in my case, contact, reminders, etc of my biological parent habe never done me good and while I have a genetic half brother, we really can't make any connection work no matter how we try. Biological enough but we continually just fall flat as far as a sibling relationship. I don't know why that is because on the other side of the coin, my stepfather mother is as far as I'm concerned, my grandmother and I'm not genetically linked to them at all. But me, eh, I've always been a blood of the covenant kind of gal, so hell if I know. I agree that people shouldn't have to have a relationship with any relative they don't want to -- but I think the option should at least be there. And, unless there are legitimate safety concerns, an effort to have some minor form of inclusion -- even if it is just the adoptive /custodial parents sending a school picture and short update -- if the child is adamant they don't want personal contact. And I feel REALLY strongly that extended step-families ( even non- official step families, shouldn't just be brushed aside as soon as the parents break up. That drives me nuts. a

Thoughts above in bold. My feelings on all this are mostly in flux, I'm learning all sorts of interesting viewpoints from this thread! I love topics that make me think, and examine why I might think the way I do.

I am conflicted regarding financial incentives /compensation for surrogacy. I understand that someone who is doing it for purely altruistic reasons may be less likely to regret the decision

( maybe? On the type of person who volunteers to give birth to help another woman might be exactly the type of person who would regret the decision :think: ) . But offering to be a gestational surrogate in order to finance your education, or provide a better life for yourself -- I don't see why that is inherently " worse" than doing the same thing for free?

Of course, that's based on an assumption that surrogacy is, just as a concept, ethical. Which I'm also somewhat conflicted about, the more I read.

Like I said, really interesting topic!

[Annasopinion]

My position doesn't change. I don't have a problem with the adoption of unwanted children in the world already created. Nothing can be done now to prevent their coming into being. Taking care of those children is extremely important.

I'm sorry if it's hurtful.

Unfortunately we all have things in life we can't have. We all have hardships.

If I need a kidney I'm not going to pay someone in the third world to give me one. Or an unstable woman with a martyr complex and mental health issues. No Way.

Right. And I'm so tired of this "I want" mentality. I have a friend in the same situation - she would move heaven and earth, sell everything she owns, do whatever it takes...just to have a baby. And you have to ask yourself, does she really need a baby? or has the baby become something that represents a deeper problem? The fact that her whole life is devoted to this cause - getting pregnant- really makes me wonder if she's fit to be a parent in the first place. These people are usually looking for something that a child cannot give in the long term and its unfair to expect them to satisfy the emotional shortfall pit their parents obviously suffer from.

No, we can't all have what we want. Yes, everyone is battling something. No I wouldn't take a liver or kidney from a third world refugee - even if they were keen to sell me theirs because it would mean a better life for them. Of course, I am in the minority when it comes to this opinion as I also wouldn't fly to India to have a surrogate carry my child as many gay couples from Australia have done. It is an extension of the same thing. All surrogacy is. This 'gift' involves you giving away another human (and THEIR RIGHTS) without their consent. The fact that women CAN and certainly DO go through with it, doesn't mean they should. Daniel has an inherent right to a mother - this has been stolen from him. And nothing anyone does now or in the future will remedy this loss. Not two dads, not three dads, not four. When you decide that a human is something you can purchase, you are no longer interested in the best outcome for that child - what you are is invested in your own vision - at any cost.

[Annasopinion]

The organ trade and developing world surrogacy are two sides if the same coin.

I'm not going to buy something from a person that would not otherwise be for sale had the person not been poor or desperate. That's exploitation!

If giving money helps them and makes me feel good then there is a multitude of beneficial non exploitative ways I can do that. I need not resort to treating a fellow human as my handmaiden.

Would I exploit a family member by taking a kidney or renting their womb? Nope. If a family member wanted to give me a kidney I'd consider it a lesser of two evils. But would I use my sister to conceive a child even if she felt she could handle it? No.

It does parallel with Lauren in the sense that had Her husband not gone insane (or indeed that Lauren had had a different upbringing) she wouldn't be doing all these bizarre things.

When you go to India or Thailand to have a surrogate carry your baby, what you're really saying is: I'm better than you, my humanity has more value and therefore you will supply me with what I want (a human gestation) and I will give you what you need (money).

The fact that some 'developed' world women like Lauren do this is an interesting dynamic, but it certainly isn't the mainstay of the trade.Lauren clearly has a martyr complex and the whole giving away of Daniel who is her genetic child, is against the very core basis and value of what it has meant to be 'human' up until this point in history. If all these people so desperate for children, so desperate to express their love and really meant it, then they'd adopt existing children in need of love and who are already suffering from not having that. But goldstars don't want 'someone else's' baby! they want their 'own' baby, even though this is impossible according to human biology - so they create a situation whereby they can purchase what they want. WHERE THEY CAN PURCHASE WHAT THEY WANT. This is human trade.

[LadyBlue]

:agree: Surrogacy and it's opposite side of the coin, infant adoption, are human trafficking. There's just no way to get around it. Babies are treated as property to be passed around by adults so that certain adults can get what they want. There is nearly always a huge power differential between the mothers of the children and the buyers, such that free choice really isn't an option, even if the lies, coercion and manipulation ended immediately. In adoption, the "fees" charged by agencies, if given directly to the mother would, in many cases, allow her to keep her child. Instead, adopters get massive tax credits and often even monthly benefits for adopting. The system is also incredibly racist and ableist. It treats children as commodities you can get rid of if they aren't what you ordered (see rehoming adoptees, abandonment of disabled surragy babies by buyers).

Do I feel awful for people who would really like to concieve and can't? Yes, I spent 2 years in that boat myself. But there's lots of things in life we want and can't have. A baby won't fill the hole in your heart, and expecting them to is cruel, unfair and damaging. Sometimes grown-ups just have to accept they can't have what they want, get help for their grief and move on, rather than burying their pain by causing it to a defenceless newborn.

FYI Many adult adoptee consider adoption a form of slavery. Even as adults, most adoptees in America have no right to their original birth certificates, much less the right to get out of an adoption. We are the only party who signs nothing, agrees to nothing and yet are bound for LIFE to the adoption contract. Guardianship would more than allow adopters to parent while still giving adoptees their basic rights, but too many adopters want those ownership papers aka falsified birth certificates.

Since I'm sure most of this will fall on deaf ears, I will just plead that anyone reading who decides to adopt or do surrogacy read the blogs of adults who have lived it (NOT the parents), learn from them, and get counseling for your own grief and loss BEFORE you do anything else.

[KnittingOwl]

I'm confused by aspects of this discussion of surrogacy. I definitely agree that the pay for surrogacy in other nations (thinking of the cases in Thailand) are terrible, but I don't understand the opposition if someone is willing to carry a baby without financial compensation.

I currently have a friend who is using a gestational surrogate in the US because she cannot safely carry a baby. From what she's told me, it's discouraged to have the gestational surrogate also be the egg donor. The baby is genetically hers and her husbands. A friend, who has been a surrogate before, is carrying the child. Surrogate will be there for baby after birth, but not in the role of mother.

I guess I don't understand the problem. Admittedly, I am only looking at it from my friend's perspective as she is finally having the child she's wanted after struggling with infertility and multiple losses for 8 years. LadyBlue, is there a specific site you could point me to with discussions from the children's perspective?

[Mama Mia]

Right. And I'm so tired of this "I want" mentality. I have a friend in the same situation - she would move heaven and earth, sell everything she owns, do whatever it takes...just to have a baby. And you have to ask yourself, does she really need a baby? or has the baby become something that represents a deeper problem? The fact that her whole life is devoted to this cause - getting pregnant- really makes me wonder if she's fit to be a parent in the first place. These people are usually looking for something that a child cannot give in the long term and its unfair to expect them to satisfy the emotional shortfall pit their parents obviously suffer from.

No, we can't all have what we want. Yes, everyone is battling something. No I wouldn't take a liver or kidney from a third world refugee - even if they were keen to sell me theirs because it would mean a better life for them. Of course, I am in the minority when it comes to this opinion as I also wouldn't fly to India to have a surrogate carry my child as many gay couples from Australia have done. It is an extension of the same thing. All surrogacy is. This 'gift' involves you giving away another human (and THEIR RIGHTS) without their consent. The fact that women CAN and certainly DO go through with it, doesn't mean they should. Daniel has an inherent right to a mother - this has been stolen from him. And nothing anyone does now or in the future will remedy this loss. Not two dads, not three dads, not four. When you decide that a human is something you can purchase, you are no longer interested in the best outcome for that child - what you are is invested in your own vision - at any cost.

By that line of reasoning though, isn't every human being brought into the world, ever, just part of someone else's agenda and desires? Whether those desires are as simple as being horny without condoms, or as complicated as taking the pill for 20 years so that your child can be born after you get your career established and your home purchased.

If your issue is that a child is being " given away", aren't you just saying that the child is already the property of SOMEBODY? I just don't see how you can make an accurate comparison with children and with forms of slavery or property ownership. Children are just....different. They can't exist independently, they have to be fed and cared for and taken care of for almost two decades by Someone, but that doesn't make them property.

And if a child has an inherent right to their biological mother -- what if that mother is just a cruel and heartless bitch? How is that better?

I really don't have a lot of investment in this topic - I don't know anyone ( to the best of my knowledge) who has been any part of a surrogacy arrangement. I have one older relative who gave a child up for adoption, and a young relative who considered it. But those are the only two adoption type stories I know of personally.

What I DO have a lot of experience with are kids who are bounced in and out of the foster system - over, and over, and over. It's a generally horrible , traumatic situation for them. I definitely think many of these kids, the ones who spend YEARS in foster care, would benefit if their parents placed them for adoption. Obviously there are many families who can successfully parent their kids after hitting a bump, even a huge bump. But there really are quite a few who just can not make treatment stick, or every guy they bring home will be a child molester, or they are so completely self-involved that they will leave the 7 year old home to watch and feed 3 siblings while they get dressed up and go to the club. Not to mention the physically abusive ones.

And a lot of those kids will stay in foster care forever -- it would be great if that was the preferred option for families who are infertile. But often these kids aren't available for adoption, or have issues that are over the heads of the potential parents. I don't see how, in these cases, that the right to a relationship with a biological parent is the most important right.

And I , personally, find it really patronizing and arrogant when people from rich Western countries feel they know better than the women in a developing country, if they want to make a decision that they feel will benefit their own family. Talk about thinking you're better than someone!

Sorry if this is incoherent, I'm half asleep. And although I quoted your post Annasopinion, it's aimed just as part of the general discussion.

[Peas n carrots]

Here are a few websites from adoptee perspectives

http://adultadoptees.org/index.html/

http://gazillionvoices.com/

Every case is individual, and some folks feel strongly they should have been kept with the bio family and some feel no need to be in touch with their bio families.

I think another thing we have to acknowledge is how adoption has changed in the US over the past 40 years - the Baby Scoop era has morphed into the foster care era. It's not easy to adopt a healthy baby in a closed adoption in the US and now we have international adoption which comes with its own set of issues.

I do honestly wish the gold stars, Lauren, and most of all - the girls and Daniel Valor the best. I hope they can all have healthy relationships and maintain enough of a connection where Daniel and the girls can have the room to decide on what terms to have a relationship, if any.