Case of disabled surrogate parent

[2xx1xy1JD]

This case brings up a whole lot of issues: http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2 ... t=20150716

Ora Mor Yosef is quadriplegic, with muscular dystrophy. She wanted to be a mother, and looked into various options. She finally decided to use her niece as a surrogate, have her implanted with donor egg and sperm in India, and return to Israel for the birth. She then attempted to ask to be recognized as the baby's mother. Instead, child welfare authorities believed that the baby was in danger and placed her in foster care, where she has been for the past 2.5 years.

Israeli law allows for domestic surrogacy in approved cases. She did not receive approval. It also allows children carried by surrogates abroad to be brought back to Israeli if at least one parent has a genetic connection to the child. Finally, she could become the child's mother through adoption, but fears that her disability would prevent her from being approved.

Thoughts?

Personally, I feel horribly for the toddler who is being raised in foster care. Even if the home is good, it's going to be traumatic to change homes or to be raised in a place where you are not the "real" child (by birth or adoption) of your parents.

I'm fairly open minded about surrogacy, but can't see how authorities could have any basis to see her as the mother. There is no biological connection at all - donor sperm, donor egg, surrogate. I don't think that making arrangements is enough to get you recognized as a parent, without going through an adoption procedure including home study.

I have no idea, just based on the story, if the baby was truly "in danger". I hope that the social worker wasn't ignorant about disabled parents. People with disabilities can indeed parent well, but it does require a larger support system. It would need to be incredibly strong and committed in order to deal with the demands of a quadriplegic single mother and a toddler.

[catparty]

That's really complicated and I'm not sure how I feel about it. While I don't support the child being taken away if those aid systems were indeed in place, what did the (prospective) mother expect would happen?

If one doesn't qualify for adoption, why would they expect to just be handed custody when they opt for surrogacy?

[nausicaa]

It does seem really irresponsible to me that she knew the rules and yet flaunted them anyway. If you disagree with a law and want to break it as an act of protest, fine. But in this case a child was brought into the mix. A child who is now in foster care and has no biological or legal connection to anyone. That is shockingly shortsighted and irresponsible on the part of the adults who participated in this.

Also, I don't believe all disabilities should be lumped together. According to this woman, she requires three caretakers right now. That alone gives me quite a bit of :shifty-kitty: And did these caretakers get any say in this child being added to the household, since I'm sure they will have to do a large part of the physical work?

And if the family is so involved and supportive, why didn't one of them step up and take in the infant rather than having her placed into foster care? Granted things may work differently in Israel, but my understanding is that in the U.S. every effort is made to place a child with a family member before putting the child into foster care?

[VelociRapture]

I think this quote sums it up for me:

But her case leaves him uncomfortable overall, concerned that in the drive to fulfill desires to parent, the best interests of the child can become secondary.

"People who care about whether it's fair to them may be less focused on the child," he says, emphasizing he is not familiar with this case beyond the court ruling. "I'm not saying it's in this case. But I'm saying that when that happens, it's not the best interest of the child. It's the best interest of me."

I'm not saying that she doesn't love the child very much - I'm sure she does. . . but is she going to be able to provide the care that this child needs and deserves?

Her biggest mistake was playing tiptoe around the laws in place with something this important. She may not have broken any laws, but she willingly tried to go around them in order to get what she wants.

This is a really tough situation. I just really hope that little girl is ok.

[Grimalkin]

I think the statement about focusing on weather or not this is fair takes the focus off the child and what that child's rights are hit me the most. They say she has a loving family, why is the child not with them? It is possible that was not an option, but I would be fighting for custody of that child if my family member were denied it. After that I would go from there. If I had custody, I could help her care for the child. I have to imagine if her family gave their blessing, they would have a back up plan in place in case she became sick or more incapacitated for some reason. It does not seem to me that they considered the long term big picture of what this child will need. This may be a morbid thought but does being a quadriplegic combined with her health problems shorten her life expectancy? I don't think she was considering the child in this case at all.

(we need more information on the family and their involvement to really know this)

[Three and Done]

This may be a very unpopular opinion, but I'm going to put it out there anyway.

I feel the "mother" in this case is incredibly selfish. Intentionally bringing a child into the world that you are completely incapable of caring for is the very definition of that word.

Have we really become so concerned about political correctness that we can't state simple facts?

[Rubyroo]

This is a tough one. It is strange to me that she didn't apply for adoption once it became her only hope. Apparently she has been turned down for being a parent, though. I looked and looked and only found two other news articles about this case (in English, there may be more in other languages?) ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4379594,00.html and ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4645039,00.html but there isn't any more in those than in the NPR page.

I looked into MS MD to see if I could find a life span, but it turns out there are like 9 major types of MS MD and some of those types have subtypes. But I didn't see any types of quadriplegic MS MD that did not have a shorter life expectanty. The only ones that have 'normal' life expectancies are the ones which don't put you in a chair by age 40. In a way, I hope the little girl doesn't have to hear about any of this; that would be very confusing and scary, in my mind.

[Snarkylark]

This is a tough one. It is strange to me that she didn't apply for adoption once it became her only hope. Apparently she has been turned down for being a parent, though. I looked and looked and only found two other news articles about this case (in English, there may be more in other languages?) ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4379594,00.html and ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4645039,00.html but there isn't any more in those than in the NPR page.

I looked into MS to see if I could find a life span, but it turns out there are like 9 major types of MS and some of those types have subtypes. But I didn't see any types of quadriplegic MS that did not have a shorter life expectanty. The only ones that have 'normal' life expectancies are the ones which don't put you in a chair by age 40. In a way, I hope the little girl doesn't have to hear about any of this; that would be very confusing and scary, in my mind.

She has muscular dystrophy, not multiple sclerosis.

[Snarkylark]

Crazy story. What a mess. I feel for the child and the woman who wants a child so badly.

[Rubyroo]

She has muscular dystrophy, not multiple sclerosis.

Whoops, my bad. I meant to type MD but apparently typed MS. All because I didn't want to type out the entire words :doh: I just rechecked and I was looking at muscular dystrophy pages, not multiple sclerosis pages. I'll see if I can edit that post. Can I blame this mistype on my fingers?

[DGayle]

A child isn't a puppy or a fish. If you are entirely unable to provide for and take care of your own needs, you can't do it for a child. I get wanting to have a baby, and not being able to. I was in that boat! I have friends who still won't because of genetic problems! I'm with Three and Done on this. I think the woman did the wrong thing, and I think the country is right to be worried about the baby. Caretaking for a quad is a full-time job, and adding a baby needing full time care is so dangerous, and that poor baby would really be raised by a revolving door of people.

[Geechee Girl]

Skirting the laws is Sparkling's & GSG's level of sketchiness. Am I correct in assuming this woman intended to be a single mother? If so, she should have made doubly sure that baby was hers or another family member via genetics. Is private adoption not legal in Israel? Did the niece surrender her parental rights after the birth? I'm not understanding how no one in this family stepped up for the baby.

[DGayle]

Skirting the laws is Sparkling's & GSG's level of sketchiness. Am I correct in assuming this woman intended to be a single mother? If so, she should have made doubly sure that baby was hers or another family member via genetics. Is private adoption not legal in Israel? Did the niece surrender her parental rights after the birth? I'm not understanding how no one in this family stepped up for the baby.

Taking on the care of a baby is a major undertaking. Her other family shouldn't be expected to be on the hook.

[Geechee Girl]

Taking on the care of a baby is a major undertaking. Her other family shouldn't be expected to be on the hook.

I get what you're saying, but that logic is foreign to me. It doesn't set right with my soul that this baby is with strangers when 2 members of the family were involved with bringing her about.

[Grimalkin]

I cannot wrap my head around somebody willing to hand over a baby to a person who cannot provide the most basic needs. Babies and toddlers and young children are very active and require constant supervision. They need to be played with, and chased, and tickled,and picked up, rolled around with, and danced with..... It seems like her care workers would have to do that. Unless you're Lisa Pennington or the Maxwells the kids won't do it when its convenient and fits your schedule. You can't expect them to quietly entertain themselves until you are ready to play.

This whole scenario is completely nuts. I wonder if there is a reason the child was not placed with family. Either they didn't want to care for her or were deemed unfit.

[DGayle]

I get what you're saying, but that logic is foreign to me. It doesn't set right with my soul that this baby is with strangers when 2 members of the family were involved with bringing her about.

The responsibility is firmly on this woman and her niece. Babies are expensive and time-consuming, and become expensive and time-consuming children and then teenagers. It's EXTREMELY unfair to expect other relatives who had literally no say to step up and take on an 18+year major obligation like this. They shouldn't be looked down on. What doesn't set right with MY soul is the expectation that people who don't want or can't afford a child should suck it up and take in a child. Surely that child wouldn't realize that she is only there to meet with the approval of some people on the internet.

If you want a pragmatic reason, since apparently taking in a child is no bigger a deal than taking in a fish, not everyone has room in their homes.

My own family taking in another child would mean having to move because of occupancy laws in our area. We legally couldn't have another person in this rental unit. We can't afford to move. Would it be wrong that we aren't willing to strap ourselves to the point of being unable to breathe to take on someone else's responsibility? Wouldn't be fair to our kids, another child, or ourselves.

That toddler's better off in a home where she is wanted by people who can afford her, instead of taken in by people who can't afford her or who don't want to raise another child. The woman in this case is being selfish since she's stopping that child from having permanency by fighting for a child she is literally entirely unable to care for and who'd be raised by other people anyway. She makes me think of the people who "adopt" African orphans and pay $30/mo for them so they can brag about "adopting," only in this case, she wants to be able to see the child on occasion, who other people would be raising.

[roddma]

This may be a very unpopular opinion, but I'm going to put it out there anyway.

I feel the "mother" in this case is incredibly selfish. Intentionally bringing a child into the world that you are completely incapable of caring for is the very definition of that word.

Have we really become so concerned about political correctness that we can't state simple facts?

I 'totally' agree.I wonder does this woman really want a child or she just fears being alone, being looked down on for not having children? I get wanting a child, I have been there, but there is also exercising common sense. And even if she can afford the child, there is more to it than that. As said above, toddlers need to be cuddled, played with,chased after etc. This is a complex case here desires overrode common sense.

[OkToBeTakei]

This may be a very unpopular opinion, but I'm going to put it out there anyway.

I feel the "mother" in this case is incredibly selfish. Intentionally bringing a child into the world that you are completely incapable of caring for is the very definition of that word.

Have we really become so concerned about political correctness that we can't state simple facts?

I think it's natural to feel that.

If this lady requires the assistance of three carers to function in activities of basic daily living then it is extremely unlikely she could ever provide direct basic care to her child.

As sad as this is and how as a Mum I feel for her desire to be one, my head says this would be to the detriment of a child. Especially as it was planned. :(

[catparty]

I think it's natural to feel that.

If this lady requires the assistance of three carers to function in activities of basic daily living then it is extremely unlikely she could ever provide direct basic care to her child.

As sad as this is and how as a Mum I feel for her desire to be one, my head says this would be to the detriment of a child. Especially as it was planned. :(

Having not read the article, I was under the impression that she had carers for her specific medical needs in addition to a partner. I don't doubt her ability to parent in that case, as there are many quad parents who are perfectly adequate, but on her own? No.

I don't think it's a matter of political correctness gone awry as it is the assumption that she isn't a single parent.

People entering surrogate arrangements really ought to be psychologically audited before the first procedure is even scheduled. It would avoid a lot of heartache.

[OkToBeTakei]

Having not read the article, I was under the impression that she had carers for her specific medical needs in addition to a partner. I don't doubt her ability to parent in that case, as there are many quad parents who are perfectly adequate, but on her own? No.

I don't think it's a matter of political correctness gone awry as it is the assumption that she isn't a single parent.

People entering surrogate arrangements really ought to be psychologically audited before the first procedure is even scheduled. It would avoid a lot of heartache.

She can move her head and some fingers. I realise to parent and care are two separate issues. But are they really?

[catparty]

She can move her head and some fingers. I realise to parent and care are two separate issues. But are they really?

Breaking up the thread a bit because I'm anally retentive like that.

I really hate what this woman did, it was selfish for a multitude of reasons. This kid was born with the job of being a tick off her mother's bucket list. Lame. So I'm not a fan of it on a personal level, but there's (an American) legal precedent. During the '70s, the California Supreme Court ruled in favor of a quad father: “The essence of parenting is not to be found in the harried rounds of daily carpooling endemic to modern suburban life or even in the doggedly dutiful acts of togetherness committed every weekend by well-meaning fathers and mothers across America. Rather, its essence lies in the ethical, emotional and intellectual guidance the parent gives the child throughout his formative years, and often beyond.â€

While the disabled parent wouldn't be the ones giving baths or changing diapers, they'd still fulfill the emotional and instructional role as mother or father. If there's a constant, infallible support system, is it a reasonable environment to put a child in?

When they grow older, will they have to take care of their parent's many physical needs? And if so, is it any less unfair than taking care of a depressed parent who can't leave their bed for weeks at a time, or tending to a brood of younger siblings?

I'm glad this case is getting attention because it's forcing us to ask these awkward questions. I hope something good comes of that, at least.

[DaffyDill]

Having not read the article, I was under the impression that she had carers for her specific medical needs in addition to a partner. I don't doubt her ability to parent in that case, as there are many quad parents who are perfectly adequate, but on her own? No.

I don't think it's a matter of political correctness gone awry as it is the assumption that she isn't a single parent.

People entering surrogate arrangements really ought to be psychologically audited before the first procedure is even scheduled. It would avoid a lot of heartache.

Initially, when she decided surrogacy was the best way forward, after her doctors advised pregnancy for herself was too dangerous, she didn't qualify for surrogacy as Israel's surrogacy laws do not extend to single parents. The mother then "found" herself a partner, but they were again denied as the courts were sceptical of their commitment to one another. It would seem the courts were right in that decision too, as the article reads as though he was willing to be the baby's father, but he and the mother weren't really in a relationship, just pretending to be so they qualified under the surrogacy laws, although of course that's just reading between the lines.

The first implanted embryos were her eggs and sperm presumably from the guy mentioned above. None took. So they tried India, using donor eggs, and the sperm of "a friend".

She says she didn't break any laws, but instead went around them, but acting all fast and loose with surrogacy laws is just so wrong when it leaves a small child in limbo. Apparently, as the child is eligible for adoption, she isn't applying for that, but her sister is. So maybe the child will be adopted into the family after all.

As a mother, I cannot fault her for wanting to have a child, but I really think she should have understood that being a mother often involves putting your child's needs before your own. If she had put that little girl's needs before her own, she wouldn't be in foster care as she would not have been conceived. I feel for the woman, but really, if you cannot take care of your own physical needs without assistance from three people, it's not fair to add a child into the mix.

[Grimalkin]

She can move her head and some fingers. I realise to parent and care are two separate issues. But are they really?

I think I would feel better about it if there was a second person responsible for caring and raising this child even if it was unconventional.

Rather than relying on care workers.

[DGayle]

She can move her head and some fingers. I realise to parent and care are two separate issues. But are they really?

The younger Duggar kids are being raised by their older sisters. We don't give Michelle a free pass. I'm sure she cares about the kids, but she doesn't parent them, and we tear her and DimBulb to shreds for it.

[DGayle]

When they grow older, will they have to take care of their parent's many physical needs? And if so, is it any less unfair than taking care of a depressed parent who can't leave their bed for weeks at a time, or tending to a brood of younger siblings?

Children shouldn't be conceived with a future job in mind for them already. It's one thing if an injury or something happens later, but when you conceive a child with it in mind that they're likely going to be your full-time caregiver, that's just so disgustingly wrong that I don't know where to begin.