Surrogate offered $10,000 to abort baby

[natyanayaki]

(CNN) -- Crystal Kelley ran through the calendar once again in her head

Comments

[princesethking]

It's horrible that the parents felt the need to try and bully her into an abortion, but it's also horrible that Kelley ran away to a different state with the child.

[the_gabih]

Idk, considering the bio parents wanted to put the child into care, I don't think it was that bad? Given that they didn't want the baby around after birth, I don't see a problem with the surrogate mother trying to do the best she could for her.

[beetlebums]

It's their child tho. not the surrogate's.

[molkat]

If you're morally against abortion, why not wait until you can find a couple who would agree to not have an abortion clause in the contract? Why not be upfront with the the parents that you won't abort under any circumstance because if you sign the contract they're going to assume you're okay with its terms?

From the story it sounds like the parents would pass on working with Kelley if they had known her beliefs since they had gone through having medical issues with children and knew clearly what they would do.

[mahasin]

Because $20,000, that's why.

[box_of_rocks]

Or possibly because she didn't know how she would feel, being asked to abort a 5 month fetus, until she was actually in the situation?

[mahasin]

She'd always been against abortion for religious and moral reasons, but she really needed the money.

[mingemonster]

If you get another person pregnant, that person may or may not abort and there's nothing you can do about it except talk to them and try to bring them around to your point of view. That's the risk you take when you make someone pregnant.

This is exactly why I'm against surrogacy. You can't buy or sell women's bodies like this, and you can't buy and sell children, it's wrong and immoral. The right to decide about abortion always has to lie with the person who is actually pregnant, regardless of what agreements have been made. You cannot sign away your bodily autonomy, and if you try to force someone else into it (having to choose between paying your rent or having/not having an abortion is duress) you are a piece of shit.

I don't understand why people are so willing to take control away from women when it comes to reproductive rights as soon as money is involved.

[the_gabih]

I don't understand why people are so willing to take control away from women when it comes to reproductive rights as soon as money is involved.

I figure it's because they're so used to thinking of women's bodies- especially the reproductive parts- as objects that if they're being used to make money, then that pretty much solidifies that view.

[natyanayaki]

In the case of surrogacy are her right taken away, or is she waiving her rights?

Ugh there are so many problems with surrogacy...

[cindyanne1]

In the case of surrogacy are her right taken away, or is she waiving her rights?

That's the question that I wonder about too. And, if she is waiving her rights, at what point does that become clearly established?

[natyanayaki]

To say that the contract negates her right to autonomy over her body is to reduce her an incubator.

I think that's the problem with surrogacy, it reduces women to incubators --at least until there are better standards (but even then, I'd be uncomfortable with it).

[winniechili]

Sure it reduces a surrogate to an incubator. But she signed the contract to do that. She chose that option.

[mingemonster]

You can't sign away your human rights. You can't consent to have an abortion before you're even pregnant without the right to change your mind.

[natyanayaki]

Because the US offers very little in terms of a safety net, and she needed to feed her daughters?

Because it's "creating" a life, rather than "preventing" one?

[natyanayaki]

I don't disagree with you, it just seems that she was extremely desperate and probably convinced herself that nothing bad would happen.