I think that when you agree to be a surrogate you are kind of giving up the decision making regarding your own uterus and body. I mean, lets say in order to ensure a healthy birth of the baby she needed to get some sort of shot, does she have the right to refuse those shots if it means the fetus wouldn't survive?
I don't think she (or anyone) should be forced to have an abortion against her will but I'm sure there was a clause for that in the contract. I also don't think she has the right to hoist a child with a low survival expectancy on people, because I think that's just cruel. I think the parents had a right to say "This child probably won't live and that will be soul crushing and financially and emotionally crippling and we don't want to do that".
I think my problem is more that Kelley comes across as a terrible person. She wanted to make $22,000, which she'd only get for the months she'd be pregnant. I have a big problem with surrogacy anyways but that's a rant for a different time. But I'd certainly never hire a surrogate who wouldn't consent to an abortion.
Precisely. She should not have signed a contract including an eventuality she was not prepared to commit to. It wasn't a penalty for behavior she could avoid, just a random chance.
I kind of feel she might owe the family some sort of a refund...or the legal fees. But having this single mom who is short on cash pay won't help anyone either. Ugh. Such a mess.
If she's morally against abortion, then why sign a contract with an abortion clause? Why ask for more money?
This. She was willing to do it for $15,000 but claims she changed her mind immediately... not when the parents refused to pay that amount. Sure, I believe that.
I was honestly expecting to read she'd fled to Michigan, had the baby, kept her, and was now suing the parents for the full cost of medical care and whatever other money she could get.
I wouldn't be surprised if she refused the abortion and voided the contract for that reason. Like you said earlier, the only people who seem to be guilt free are the adoptive parents, but I'm not sure that there isn't something more there either.
except you think that the surrogate parents who attempted to coerce a poor woman into having an abortion against her will are blameless ("guilt free") in this
my bad, i misread and thought you meant the surrogate parents.
it's still disgusting that you (and others) are sitting around having a high-horsed moral debate on whether this woman deserves bodily autonomy and to be paid for the work that she's done. in addition, i know you didn't say this: I think that when you agree to be a surrogate you are kind of giving up the decision making regarding your own uterus and body. but you did respond to it uncritically.
honestly, i don't know what else to say. the fact that poor women have very little recourse in the situation she was in actually makes me feel ill. that people are judging her for that makes me feel ill. the casually dehumanizing way and derogatory way in which this woman is being discussed (like a contract supercedes her rights as a human being) is makes me feel ill.
Actually, I have said several times that I support and vehemently defend her bodily autonomy, nor have I said that the contract supercedes her bodily autonomy. I have said that they are two separate issues, the fact that you're making assumptions, and ignoring facts in order to legitimize your non sequitur is very telling.
I don't think she (or anyone) should be forced to have an abortion against her will but I'm sure there was a clause for that in the contract. I also don't think she has the right to hoist a child with a low survival expectancy on people, because I think that's just cruel. I think the parents had a right to say "This child probably won't live and that will be soul crushing and financially and emotionally crippling and we don't want to do that".
I think my problem is more that Kelley comes across as a terrible person. She wanted to make $22,000, which she'd only get for the months she'd be pregnant. I have a big problem with surrogacy anyways but that's a rant for a different time. But I'd certainly never hire a surrogate who wouldn't consent to an abortion.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
If she's morally against abortion, then why sign a contract with an abortion clause? Why ask for more money?
This. She was willing to do it for $15,000 but claims she changed her mind immediately... not when the parents refused to pay that amount. Sure, I believe that.
I was honestly expecting to read she'd fled to Michigan, had the baby, kept her, and was now suing the parents for the full cost of medical care and whatever other money she could get.
/is cynical
Reply
Reply
We're both realists very cynical people. ;)
Reply
Reply
LOL, yes I do! I trust my cats more than most people, heh.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Try again.
Reply
it's still disgusting that you (and others) are sitting around having a high-horsed moral debate on whether this woman deserves bodily autonomy and to be paid for the work that she's done. in addition, i know you didn't say this: I think that when you agree to be a surrogate you are kind of giving up the decision making regarding your own uterus and body. but you did respond to it uncritically.
honestly, i don't know what else to say. the fact that poor women have very little recourse in the situation she was in actually makes me feel ill. that people are judging her for that makes me feel ill. the casually dehumanizing way and derogatory way in which this woman is being discussed (like a contract supercedes her rights as a human being) is makes me feel ill.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment