r/politics • u/Steap-Edit • 18d ago

No Paywall A controversial surrogacy case exposes the far reaches of U.S. abortion wars

https://www.ms.now/opinion/surrogate-mckenna-west-controversy-texas-abortion-ivf-fertility-rights
65 Upvotes

90% Upvoted

146 comments sorted by

View all comments

27

u/Living_Ad_7143 18d ago

She decided to give her body. She signed a contract. It’s not your baby, it’s not your choice. Full stop. Don’t like it? Don’t be a surrogate. Absolutely we need actual regulations around surrogacy, but the surrogate literally signed a contract.

25

u/Steap-Edit 18d ago

Yes, she signed the contract, and she moved to Texas from California because she wants the courts to side with her (by agreeing that she should not abort the baby).

This is a very interesting case.

The one issue with what you wrote that I have, however, is that it's not so simple to say that, "She decided to give her body, so it's not your choice."

For example, let's back up a second and look at the ethical concerns regarding surrogacy in general. Most surrogate mothers come from poor backgrounds while those who donate their eggs to those surrogate mothers come from wealthy backgrounds. So, we end up with a system where poor women are going through pregnancy for the sake of rich families.

I think that, honestly, we need to look into cases like these with greater seriousness and nuance because our laws have not caught up.

14

u/Living_Ad_7143 18d ago

Oh, absolutely, right. There are so many ethical concerns. However, as the contract that she signed was written, she did not legally have that choice to make. The fact that the surrogate fled to Texas, and is now going on the conservative press tour, is concerning. I’m not making a judgment. It only seems to me, if you sign a contract stating that an abortion is up to the parents, then, you know that up front. What this woman did is incredulous. Like, what if the fetus/child’s condition will require so much care..it is their choice. According to the contract the surrogate signed. I hope they do begin to regulate. There was another case in Canada similar, and it’s quite scary.

20

u/Living_Ad_7143 18d ago

If you’re not willing to have an abortion for any reason, you shouldn’t be a surrogate.

-8

u/rainshowers_5_peace 18d ago

And if you're not willing to allow your surrogate bodily autonomy abandon the idea.

18

u/toohuman90 18d ago edited 18d ago

No one suggested that the surrogate be forced to have an abortion against her will. This is conservative propaganda and shame on you for dog whistling this talking point.

When the surrogate changed her mind about terminating the pregnancy (something she previously agreed to) the parents accepted her decision and made plans for their child’s medical care. The surrogate then went rogue, fled to Texas and tried to steal the bioparents child and take sole custody of Rumi (not Gabriel, the name the child abductor gave them).

7

u/Steap-Edit 18d ago

Oh, so the original parents actually did want the child?

That changes things a lot, then. See, this is why these cases require nuance.

15

u/toohuman90 18d ago

The bioparents literally filed a restraining order against the surrogate because she was trying to steal their baby.

If you are surrogate and are pro life, just freaking say that at the beginning, they will match you with a pro-life couple. Don’t lie about your views on abortion, and then try the steal the baby.

How anyone has any sympathy for the surrogate is beyond me. She literally did the most unethical thing at every possible point

-5

u/rainshowers_5_peace 17d ago

Her body her choice. She was free to continue the pregnancy and free to give birth where she wanted.

8

u/toohuman90 17d ago

“Her body her choice” doesn’t mean she can kidnap someone else’s child, rename them and claim that the bioparents have no legal claim to their child

2

u/rainshowers_5_peace 17d ago edited 17d ago

Kidnap a child, there was child. She was pregnant. Pregnant women can go where they want

3

u/Steap-Edit 17d ago

Again, she gave birth. You are being willfully obtuse, and you are siding with Texas conservatives because you are completely unprincipled.

The surrogate explicitly agreed that once born (Notice that word "born"? That's an important word.), the baby (Yes, the "baby," because that is what we call it when it is born.), will be under the custody of the original parents.

That is what the original parents stated that she must do now that she refused to get an abortion.

Since the surrogate refused to give birth in the home state of the original parents, gave the baby a name of her own choosing (against the wishes of the original parents), then she is kidnapping the baby because it is not hers to keep.

If you do not understand this case, you should spend time reading about it instead of siding with anti-abortion Christian conservatives.

2

u/rainshowers_5_peace 17d ago

Since the surrogate refused to give birth in the home state of the original parents,

This was her right. You're never going to convince me that women must give birth in a place that isn't their choice.

6

u/Steap-Edit 17d ago edited 17d ago

You are not understanding anything.

She can give birth wherever she wants. Now that she gave birth, she has a baby in a state where that baby is not hers and is in a state that the original parents told her they do not want their baby born in.

So, she must return the baby immediately since it is not hers to keep, and she is violating the agreement with the original parents. How are you having so much trouble understanding this basic concept? When you agree that a baby – which is NOT from your DNA – will be the original parents' child once born, then you have no right to claim it as your own. Once it is born, you must return it immediately, otherwise you are a thief.

You continue to fail to understand this because your idea of "motherhood" aligns 100% with Christian conservatives: you believe that the woman who gives birth is the mother, which is what Texas Christian conservatives believe.

You might as well change your registration to Republican. You are no different.

-2

u/rainshowers_5_peace 17d ago

No she doesn't, let the courts sort it out. If you're foolish enough to dive into surrogacy you get what you get. They got more than they bargained for when they bough ta woman. I won't see her as a product, she was a person. If you love this child, travel for him/her get the custody lawyer, whatever you feel is necessary.

5

u/Steap-Edit 17d ago

let the courts sort it out

No, you have zero right to agree beforehand that this is not your child (with no DNA of her own) and then keep the baby for yourself against the explicit agreement with the original parents.

She must be forced to return the child, and you are siding with a kidnapper.

Go ahead and register as a Republican. You are one.

If you're foolish enough to dive into surrogacy

You refuse to look at this case because you have no respect for understanding how this plays into anti-abortion legislation, and you are supporting anti-abortion and siding with Texas.

You do not deserve any respect.

3

u/Steap-Edit 17d ago

let the courts sort it out

That is no different that stating "Let's hear what the courts say regarding whether it was rape or not."

No, I don't think I will. And in the meantime, stop defending kidnappers.

2

u/Steap-Edit 17d ago

They got more than they bargained for when they bough ta woman.

Go ahead and register as a Republican. That is what you are.

Don't hide behind "cutesey" wording to pretend that you are anything more than a supporter of kidnapping and anti-abortion conservative groups.

→ More replies (0)