Personal tools
 
Views

Debate: Surrogate mothers

From Debatepedia

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 17:00, 21 May 2008 (edit)
Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs)

← Previous diff
Current revision (11:20, 3 August 2010) (edit)
Lenkahabetinova (Talk | contribs)
(Reverted edits by Alcel (Talk); changed back to last version by Brooks Lindsay)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
-{|style="font-size:85%; border:1px solid #BAC5FD; " cellpadding="0"+{|style="font-size:100%; border:1px solid #BAC5FD; " cellpadding="0"
|colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style=""| |colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style=""|
===Should surrogate motherhood be allowed?=== ===Should surrogate motherhood be allowed?===
|} |}
-This article is based on a [http://www.idebate.org/debatabase/topic_details.php?topicID=300 Debatabase] entry written by [[User:Richard Mott| Richard Mott]]. Because this document can be modified by any registered user of this site, its contents should be cited with care.+ 
-{| style="width:100%; height:100px" border="0" align="center"+
-|__TOC__+
-|}+
{|style="font-size:100%; padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;" cellpadding="5" {|style="font-size:100%; padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;" cellpadding="5"
|- |-
|bgcolor="#F7F7F7" colspan="2" style= "border:1px solid #BAC5FD"| |bgcolor="#F7F7F7" colspan="2" style= "border:1px solid #BAC5FD"|
-===Background and Context of Debate:===+===Background and context ===
A surrogate mother is a woman who carries and gives birth to a baby for another couple who are unable to have children in the normal way. This could be because the woman is unable to actually give birth, in which case the surrogate would carry the fertilised egg for the couple, or because the woman is not actually fertile, in which case the male’s sperm could be used to fertilise the surrogate’s egg by a surgical procedure. In the US, and in some other European countries it is legal for the surrogate to be paid for her role, in addition to expenses occurred. In the UK such payment is illegal, and indeed surrogacy itself is officially discouraged, by reports such as the Warnock report of 1984. A surrogate mother is a woman who carries and gives birth to a baby for another couple who are unable to have children in the normal way. This could be because the woman is unable to actually give birth, in which case the surrogate would carry the fertilised egg for the couple, or because the woman is not actually fertile, in which case the male’s sperm could be used to fertilise the surrogate’s egg by a surgical procedure. In the US, and in some other European countries it is legal for the surrogate to be paid for her role, in addition to expenses occurred. In the UK such payment is illegal, and indeed surrogacy itself is officially discouraged, by reports such as the Warnock report of 1984.
 +
 +''More background at [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surrogate_mother Wikipedia: Surrogate mothers]''
|} |}
Line 20: Line 19:
|- |-
|colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| |colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"|
-===Argument #1===+=== Parenthood: Is surrogacy an important means to parenthood for infertile couples? ===
|- |-
|width="45%" bgcolor="#FFFAE0" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| |width="45%" bgcolor="#FFFAE0" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"|
====Yes==== ====Yes====
-Surrogacy is a way to bring the happiness of parenthood to a couple who would otherwise not have been able to enjoy it, either due to biological circumstances ( for example infertile or same-sex couples ), or the unavailability of a child for adoption. The joy of parenthood is something that every couple should be able to experience.+ 
 +*'''Surrogacy brings parenthood to couples unable of have children of their own.''' This is either due to biological circumstances ( for example infertile or same-sex couples ), or the unavailability of a child for adoption. The joy of parenthood is something that every couple should be able to experience.
 + 
 + 
|width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| |width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"|
====No==== ====No====
-Contrary to the assumptions that underlie the proposition case, parenthood is not a fundamental human right. Besides, surrogacy is so controversial, and so traumatic for all concerned, that more conventional methods such as adoption should be used instead. Parents should not put their own desire to be parents over the possible damage it might cause to the baby.+ 
 +*'''Parenthood, through surrogacy, is not a fundamental right.''' Contrary to the assumptions that underlie the proposition case, parenthood is not a fundamental human right. Besides, surrogacy is so controversial, and so traumatic for all concerned, that more conventional methods such as adoption should be used instead. Parents should not put their own desire to be parents over the possible damage it might cause to the baby.
 + 
 + 
|- |-
|colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| |colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"|
-===Argument #2===+===Commercial: Is surrogacy likely to be commercialized? Is this exploitative? ===
|- |-
|width="45%" bgcolor="#FFFAE0" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| |width="45%" bgcolor="#FFFAE0" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"|
====Yes==== ====Yes====
-There is no need for money payments to ever enter the equation. Even if commercialisation does occur, it would be controlled by strict laws and regulated by independent bodies, as is currently the case in the US. If standard charges were fixed there would simply be no room for a market to develop, thus ensuring that all had access to a surrogate if they wanted.+ 
 +*'''Surrogacy need not involve money payments of any kind.''' Even if commercialisation does occur, it would be controlled by strict laws and regulated by independent bodies, as is currently the case in the US. If standard charges were fixed there would simply be no room for a market to develop, thus ensuring that all had access to a surrogate if they wanted.
 + 
 +*'''[[Argument: Surrogacy is not inherently exploitative; exploitation can be minimized| Surrogacy is not inherently exploitative; exploitation can be minimized]]''' The argument that surrogacy is exploitative rests primarily on the economic conditions of a woman that might cause her to "involuntarily" offer her body in surrogacy in exchange for money. Yet, this does not mean that surrogacy is inherently exploitative and is not sufficient grounds for banning the practice. Measures need only be taken that will help minimize instances of exploitation.
 + 
 + 
|width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| |width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"|
====No==== ====No====
-Surrogacy will eventually and inevitably become commercialised, with mothers ‘hiring out’ their wombs to the highest bidder. Even if charges are standardised, the high level of such a fee will still ena that the rich are more likely to benefit than the poor, as they are more likely to be able to afford the cost. No case of parenthood should simply be decided by financial factors.+*'''Surrogacy will inevitably become commercial.''' If there is a demand for surrogacy, there is little doubt that it will be commercialized by those looking to turn a profit on the practice.
 + 
 +*'''Commercial surrogacy is exploitative.''' Commercial surrogacy would involve women ‘hiring out’ their wombs to the highest bidder. This might be motivated by a woman's poor economic circumstances. In any case, a women can be seen as offering the exploitation of her body for commercial gain.
 + 
 +*'''Commercialize surrogacy will benefit the rich more than the poor.''' Even if charges are standardized, the high level of such a fee will still ensure that the rich are more likely to benefit than the poor, as they are more likely to be able to afford the cost. No case of parenthood should simply be decided by financial factors.
 + 
 + 
|- |-
|colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| |colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"|
-===Argument #3===+===Family friend: Should "a friend of the family" act as a surrogate mother? ===
|- |-
|width="45%" bgcolor="#FFFAE0" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| |width="45%" bgcolor="#FFFAE0" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"|
====Yes==== ====Yes====
-However, surrogacy arrangements could easily be made non-financial by allowing a friend of the family to be the surrogate, hence avoiding any legal wrangling after the birth, which can often happen when strangers are involved. It would also avoid the situation where a child has a stranger as their natural mother, which has been known to cause them problems.+ 
 +*'''Surrogate mothers could be "a friend of the family" to avoid payments''' This could help avoiding any legal wrangling after the birth, which can often happen when strangers are involved. It would also avoid the situation where a child has a stranger as their natural mother, which has been known to cause them problems.
 + 
 + 
 + 
|width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| |width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"|
====No==== ====No====
-This arrangement would in fact create more problems than it solved, as such an unofficial arrangement would be a legal nightmare if the surrogate decided ( as has often happened ) to keep the baby, as she would of course be the child’s legal mother. Important links are formed between mother and baby in the first nine months, and to forcibly sever these links would be devastating for all concerned. Also, it would be far more confusing and damaging for the child if their biological mother was someone who from an early age they had known as a friend of their ‘parents’.+ 
 +*'''It is a bad idea for surrogate mothers to be "friends of the family".''' This arrangement would in fact create more problems than it solved, as such an unofficial arrangement would be a legal nightmare if the surrogate decided ( as has often happened ) to keep the baby, as she would of course be the child’s legal mother. Important links are formed between mother and baby in the first nine months, and to forcibly sever these links would be devastating for all concerned. Also, it would be far more confusing and damaging for the child if their biological mother was someone who from an early age they had known as a friend of their ‘parents’.
 + 
 + 
 + 
|- |-
|colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| |colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"|
-===Argument #4===+===Enforcement: Is is impossible to enforce anti-surrogacy laws? ===
|- |-
|width="45%" bgcolor="#FFFAE0" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| |width="45%" bgcolor="#FFFAE0" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"|
====Yes==== ====Yes====
-On a practical note, no law against surrogacy could be enforced properly, but would merely lead to the physical impregnation of the surrogate by the would-be father, rather than a clean surgical procedure that avoided the emotional problems caused by an actual sexual act between the surrogate and the would-be father.+ 
 +*'''On a practical note, no law against surrogacy could be enforced properly.''' It would merely lead to the physical impregnation of the surrogate by the would-be father, rather than a clean surgical procedure that avoided the emotional problems caused by an actual sexual act between the surrogate and the would-be father.
 + 
 + 
|width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| |width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"|
====No==== ====No====
-Even if there would be problems in enforcing a ban, we should still lay down the law; such an argument used against, say, growing cannabis at home would not invalidate a ban on drugs. Surrogacy is bad for both the mother and the child, and is beset by emotional problems for all concerned. Parents should not put their own interests above their child’s.+ 
 +*'''The difficulty of enforcing surrogacy laws does not justify abandoning them.''' Even if there would be problems in enforcing a ban, we should still lay down the law; such an argument used against, say, growing cannabis at home would not invalidate a ban on drugs. Surrogacy is bad for both the mother and the child, and is beset by emotional problems for all concerned. Parents should not put their own interests above their child’s.
 + 
 + 
 + 
|- |-
-|colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#f9f9f9" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;"|+|colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#f2f2f2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;"|
-==References==+===Pro/con resources===
-== Motions ==+|-
 +|width="45%" bgcolor="#FFFAE0" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"|
 +====Yes====
-* This House supports surrogate mothers+*[http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-8519.00331?cookieSet=1&journalCode=biot Stephen Wilkinson. "The exploitation argument against commercial surrogacy". Centre for Professional Ethics, Keele University, UK. April 2003]
-* This House believes parenthood is a right.+
-* Surrogate motherhood should be supported+
-==This debate in legislation, policy, and elsewhere==+
-==See also on Debatepedia==+|width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"|
 + 
 +====No====
 + 
 +|-
 +|colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"|
-==External links and resources:==+==External links ==
* [http://www.surromomsonline.com/ Surrogate Mothers Online] * [http://www.surromomsonline.com/ Surrogate Mothers Online]
Line 83: Line 118:
* [http://www.murdoch.edu.au/elaw/indices/subject/607.html Surrogate motherhood law in Australia] * [http://www.murdoch.edu.au/elaw/indices/subject/607.html Surrogate motherhood law in Australia]
* [http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19870222_respect-for-human-life_en.html Vatican statement] * [http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19870222_respect-for-human-life_en.html Vatican statement]
 +
== Books == == Books ==
Line 90: Line 126:
* [http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0807044091/interntionaldeba/104-5333130-0270319 Making Babies, Making Families : What Matters Most in an Age of Reproductive Technologies, Surrogacy, Adoption, and Same-Sex and Unwed Parents' RIghts] : Mary L. Shanley * [http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0807044091/interntionaldeba/104-5333130-0270319 Making Babies, Making Families : What Matters Most in an Age of Reproductive Technologies, Surrogacy, Adoption, and Same-Sex and Unwed Parents' RIghts] : Mary L. Shanley
|} |}
 +
[[Category:Debatabase]] [[Category:Debatabase]]
-[[Category:Legislation and policy]]+[[Category:Parenting]]
-[[Category:Legal]]+[[Category:Adoption]]
-[[Category:Sex and reproduction]]+[[Category:Reproduction]]
[[Category:Family]] [[Category:Family]]
 +[[Category:Life and death]]

Current revision

[Digg]
[reddit]
[Delicious]
[Facebook]

Should surrogate motherhood be allowed?

Background and context

A surrogate mother is a woman who carries and gives birth to a baby for another couple who are unable to have children in the normal way. This could be because the woman is unable to actually give birth, in which case the surrogate would carry the fertilised egg for the couple, or because the woman is not actually fertile, in which case the male’s sperm could be used to fertilise the surrogate’s egg by a surgical procedure. In the US, and in some other European countries it is legal for the surrogate to be paid for her role, in addition to expenses occurred. In the UK such payment is illegal, and indeed surrogacy itself is officially discouraged, by reports such as the Warnock report of 1984.

More background at Wikipedia: Surrogate mothers

[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section down]

Parenthood: Is surrogacy an important means to parenthood for infertile couples?

[Add New]

Yes

  • Surrogacy brings parenthood to couples unable of have children of their own. This is either due to biological circumstances ( for example infertile or same-sex couples ), or the unavailability of a child for adoption. The joy of parenthood is something that every couple should be able to experience.


[Add New]

No

  • Parenthood, through surrogacy, is not a fundamental right. Contrary to the assumptions that underlie the proposition case, parenthood is not a fundamental human right. Besides, surrogacy is so controversial, and so traumatic for all concerned, that more conventional methods such as adoption should be used instead. Parents should not put their own desire to be parents over the possible damage it might cause to the baby.


[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section down]
[Move subquestion section up]

Commercial: Is surrogacy likely to be commercialized? Is this exploitative?

[Add New]

Yes

  • Surrogacy need not involve money payments of any kind. Even if commercialisation does occur, it would be controlled by strict laws and regulated by independent bodies, as is currently the case in the US. If standard charges were fixed there would simply be no room for a market to develop, thus ensuring that all had access to a surrogate if they wanted.
  • Surrogacy is not inherently exploitative; exploitation can be minimized The argument that surrogacy is exploitative rests primarily on the economic conditions of a woman that might cause her to "involuntarily" offer her body in surrogacy in exchange for money. Yet, this does not mean that surrogacy is inherently exploitative and is not sufficient grounds for banning the practice. Measures need only be taken that will help minimize instances of exploitation.


[Add New]

No

  • Surrogacy will inevitably become commercial. If there is a demand for surrogacy, there is little doubt that it will be commercialized by those looking to turn a profit on the practice.
  • Commercial surrogacy is exploitative. Commercial surrogacy would involve women ‘hiring out’ their wombs to the highest bidder. This might be motivated by a woman's poor economic circumstances. In any case, a women can be seen as offering the exploitation of her body for commercial gain.
  • Commercialize surrogacy will benefit the rich more than the poor. Even if charges are standardized, the high level of such a fee will still ensure that the rich are more likely to benefit than the poor, as they are more likely to be able to afford the cost. No case of parenthood should simply be decided by financial factors.


[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section down]
[Move subquestion section up]

Family friend: Should "a friend of the family" act as a surrogate mother?

[Add New]

Yes

  • Surrogate mothers could be "a friend of the family" to avoid payments This could help avoiding any legal wrangling after the birth, which can often happen when strangers are involved. It would also avoid the situation where a child has a stranger as their natural mother, which has been known to cause them problems.


[Add New]

No

  • It is a bad idea for surrogate mothers to be "friends of the family". This arrangement would in fact create more problems than it solved, as such an unofficial arrangement would be a legal nightmare if the surrogate decided ( as has often happened ) to keep the baby, as she would of course be the child’s legal mother. Important links are formed between mother and baby in the first nine months, and to forcibly sever these links would be devastating for all concerned. Also, it would be far more confusing and damaging for the child if their biological mother was someone who from an early age they had known as a friend of their ‘parents’.


[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section down]
[Move subquestion section up]

Enforcement: Is is impossible to enforce anti-surrogacy laws?

[Add New]

Yes

  • On a practical note, no law against surrogacy could be enforced properly. It would merely lead to the physical impregnation of the surrogate by the would-be father, rather than a clean surgical procedure that avoided the emotional problems caused by an actual sexual act between the surrogate and the would-be father.


[Add New]

No

  • The difficulty of enforcing surrogacy laws does not justify abandoning them. Even if there would be problems in enforcing a ban, we should still lay down the law; such an argument used against, say, growing cannabis at home would not invalidate a ban on drugs. Surrogacy is bad for both the mother and the child, and is beset by emotional problems for all concerned. Parents should not put their own interests above their child’s.


[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section up]

Pro/con resources

[Add New]

Yes

[Add New]

No

External links

Books

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits
.