Surrogate Motherhood is Unethical

I recently read an article called "Surrogate Motherhood is Unethical" by Scott B. Rae. The author is a member of a community for the Center of Bioethics Human Dignity. In the article the author states that having a surrogate mother is wrong and unethical both morally and logically. He feels that the item of discussion is nothing more than baby selling. A method only to profit from in the form of money. He talks about how some women who are the surrogate mothers for hopeful couples receive all expenses paid (medical that is) as well as a $10,000 dollar profitable fee. His article hits hard on the effects of selling the child and how this is open to a form of abuse that shouldn't ever be allowed.

I'm not sure but I gathered he was saying that you can make a living off of this. Which since it takes about nine months and a lot of dedication, I'm sure $10,000 dollars a year is a really great living.....

Right, I bet we all could live off that... As I read and researched the author, I couldn't disagree more. Scott's view seems to be directly correlating to his religious views. He neglects the why the method was established and only attacks the cases in which women made a profit- (how little it was.)

While I agree that baby selling is wrong. I believe however the purpose of surrogacy is genuine. Not every women is made perfectly, we aren't all born baby making machines. If a married couple can't for whatever reason has a child on their own, who is to damn them and say they can't have any? Yes adoption. But having seen a lot of failed adoptions in my own family, it's not for everyone. Like so many other things, this should be a person’s choice. I don't think anyone should tell someone else how to live their life. I'd hate for some religious extremist of politician take any of my rights away from me.

I totally agree with what you're saying. If a woman isn't born perfect, and has to turn to another woman to be a surrogate mother, more power to her. The will and desire to have a child of your own and care for it should not be denied simply because of genetic inability. The need to care for and raise a child - to craft them and watch them grow - is a fundamental need inherent in all human beings, especially women. To deny a person the resources to fulfill that need if, for whatever reason, they can't fulfill it themselves, is morally wrong.

And no, there won't be women living off of this surrogacy business. The woman who chooses to have a child for a couple who cannot conceive is compensated, sure. But take a look at the reason for that compensation. Hospital bills don't pay for themselves, and the ordeal of carrying a child that isn't going to be your own (both physically and mentally) is deserving of such compensation. Imagine a woman who, through the process of becoming pregnant, inevitably becomes attached to the child inside of her, only to have to painfully give it up to another family. Though the exchange was previously agreed upon, there is nothing to be done about the inherent love a mother has for her child.

As far as adoption being an alternative to surrogacy, I can see a point in that. However, a lot of parents want the experience the joy of raising a child to the fullest extent, if only pretending. When a surrogate mother is pregnant, the actual mother gets to pretend she is too by checking up on the child and attending doctor's appointments and ultrasounds. Then, when the child is born, she gets to not only be there, but have the child from square one, as apposed to adopting a child in its infancy or youth.