Log In Sign Up

A surrogate's unimaginable dilemma


Forum: Heated Debates

Notices

Welcome to the JustMommies Message Boards.

We pride ourselves on having the friendliest and most welcoming forums for moms and moms to be! Please take a moment and register for free so you can be a part of our growing community of mothers. If you have any problems registering please drop an email to boards@justmommies.com.

Our community is moderated by our moderation team so you won't see spam or offensive messages posted on our forums. Each of our message boards is hosted by JustMommies hosts, whose names are listed at the top each board. We hope you find our message boards friendly, helpful, and fun to be on!

Like Tree6Likes
  • 1 Post By ratladee
  • 1 Post By *Leslie*
  • 1 Post By *Leslie*
  • 2 Post By Quantum_Leap
  • 1 Post By *Leslie*

Reply Post New Topic
  Subscribe To Heated Debates LinkBack Topic Tools Search this Topic Display Modes
  #1  
March 5th, 2013, 07:49 AM
MindyRambo's Avatar Super Mommy
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Quebec, Canada
Posts: 799
Surrogate offered $10,000 to abort baby - CNN.com

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

It was August, and if she got pregnant soon, she could avoid carrying during the hot summer months -- she'd done that before and didn't want to do it again. There was no time to lose.

But there was one problem: She had no one to get her pregnant.

Kelley picked up the phone and called a familiar number. What about the nice single man who'd inquired before -- would he be interested? No, the woman told her. She hadn't heard from him in weeks.

Disappointed, Kelley asked if there was anyone else who would hire her. She'd had two miscarriages herself and wanted to help someone else with fertility problems. Plus, she really needed the $22,000 fee.

Hold on, the woman said, let me see.

Yes, she said, there was a couple who wanted to meet her. Was she ready to take down their e-mail address?

Absolutely, Kelley answered.

A playground meeting

Most surrogacies have happy endings, and this one should have too -- with a couple welcoming a new baby into their home and Kelley enjoying her fee, plus the satisfaction that she'd helped another family.

Instead, it ended with legal actions, a secretive flight to another state, and a frenzied rush to find parents for a fragile baby.

After speaking with the surrogacy agency, Kelley, then 29, arranged to meet the couple at a playground near her home in Vernon, Connecticut, a suburb of Hartford. When she arrived, she liked what she saw. The couple was caring and attentive with their three children, who were sweet and well-mannered and played nicely with her own two daughters. The couple desperately wanted a fourth child, but the mother couldn't have any more babies. Yes, Kelley told them right then and there. Yes, I will have a child for you.

CNN made several unsuccessful attempts to contact the couple by phone and e-mail.

The couple had conceived their children through in-vitro fertilization and had two frozen embryos left over. Doctors thawed them out and on October 8, 2011, put them in Kelley's uterus.

About 10 days later, a blood test showed she was pregnant -- one of the embryos had taken.

Kelley and the parents were thrilled, and over the next few weeks, the mother was attentive and caring. When Kelley had morning sickness the mother called every day to see how she was feeling. She gave Kelley and Kelley's daughters Christmas presents. When Kelley couldn't make rent, the mother made sure she got her monthly surrogate fee a few days early.

"She said, 'I want you to come to us with anything because you're going to be part of our lives forever,' " Kelley remembers.

The highs and lows of foreign surrogacy

'There's something wrong with the baby'

"Congratulations! You made it half through!" the mother emailed Kelley on February 6.

It was one of the last friendly e-mails between Kelley and the woman who'd hired her.

A few days later, Kelley, five months pregnant, had a routine ultrasound to make sure the baby was developing properly. The ultrasound technician struggled to see the baby's tiny heart and asked her to come back the next week when the baby would be more developed.

At that next ultrasound, the technician said it was still hard to see the heart and asked Kelley to go to Hartford Hospital, where they could do a higher-level ultrasound.

Apparently, there was more to it than that.

As Kelley was driving home, her cell phone rang. It was the baby's mother.

"She kept saying, 'There's something wrong with the baby. There's something wrong with the baby. What are we going to do?' " Kelley remembers. "She was frantic. She was panicking."

Then the midwife called. She told Kelley the ultrasound showed the baby had a cleft lip and palate, a cyst in her brain and serious heart defects. They couldn't see a stomach or a spleen.

The next ultrasound was three days away, and Kelley grew increasingly anxious with each passing day. By the time she walked into Hartford Hospital on February 16, 2012, she was 21 weeks pregnant and "absolutely terrified" of what the ultrasound would show and what the parents' reaction would be.

An emotional standoff

With the parents standing behind her, the ultrasound technician at the hospital put the wand on Kelley's stomach. The test confirmed her worst fears: It showed the baby did have a cleft lip and palate, a cyst in the brain, and a complex heart abnormality.

The doctors explained the baby would need several heart surgeries after she was born. She would likely survive the pregnancy, but had only about a 25% chance of having a "normal life," Kelley remembers the doctors saying.

In a letter to Kelley's midwife, Dr. Elisa Gianferrari, a maternal fetal medicine specialist at Hartford Hospital, and Leslie Ciarleglio, a genetic counselor, described what happened next.

"Given the ultrasound findings, (the parents) feel that the interventions required to manage (the baby's medical problems) are overwhelming for an infant, and that it is a more humane option to consider pregnancy termination," they wrote.

Kelley disagreed.

"Ms. Kelley feels that all efforts should be made to 'give the baby a chance' and seems adamantly opposed to termination," they wrote.

The letter describes how the parents tried to convince Kelley to change her mind. Their three children were born prematurely, and two of them had to spend months in the hospital and still had medical problems. They wanted something better for this child.

"The (parents) feel strongly that they pursued surrogacy in order to minimize the risk of pain and suffering for their baby," Gianferrari and Ciarleglio wrote. They "explained their feelings in detail to Ms. Kelley in hopes of coming to an agreement."

The two sides were at a standoff. The doctor and the genetic counselor offered an amniocentesis in the hope that by analyzing the baby's genes, they could learn more about her condition. Kelley was amenable, they noted, but the parents "feel that the information gained from this testing would not influence their decision to consider pregnancy termination."

The atmosphere in the room became very tense, Kelley remembers. The parents were brought into the geneticist's office to give everyone some privacy.

After a while, Kelley was reunited with the parents.

"They were both visibly upset. The mother was crying," she remembers. "They said they didn't want to bring a baby into the world only for that child to suffer. ... They said I should try to be God-like and have mercy on the child and let her go."

"I told them that they had chosen me to carry and protect this child, and that was exactly what I was going to do," Kelley said. "I told them it wasn't their decision to play God."

Then she walked out of the room.

"I couldn't look at them anymore," she said.

Best friend becomes surrogate mother

$10,000 to have an abortion

The next day, according to medical records, the mother called Hartford Hospital to ask about different types of abortion. It was explained to her that they could induce birth (the baby wouldn't survive) or they could do a dilation and evacuation, in which case the pregnancy would be vacuumed out of the womb. The mother, after asking about whether the fetus would feel any pain, said she thought the second option was best.

She asked if the procedure had been scheduled. No, she was told. Only Kelley could do that.

The mother noted that the surrogacy agency was getting in touch with Kelley, and a few days later, Kelley received an e-mail from Rita Kron at Surrogacy International telling her that if she chose to have the baby, the couple wouldn't agree to be the baby's legal parents.

"You will be the only person who will be making decision (sic) about the child, should the child is born," Kron wrote.

CNN contacted Surrogacy International, and a woman who said her name was Rita answered the phone.

"You have to understand something -- there is a privacy that exists and that's the end of the story," she said and then hung up. Kron did not return CNN's e-mails.

Kelley didn't want to be the baby's mother -- she'd gotten pregnant to help another family, not to have a child of her own. Kron gave her an option: the parents would pay her $10,000 to have an abortion.

The offer tested Kelley's convictions. She'd always been against abortion for religious and moral reasons, but she really needed the money. Just before getting pregnant, she'd lost her job as a nanny, and the only income she had coming in was child support from her daughters' father and her monthly surrogacy fee of $2,222, which was about to end because of the dispute with the parents.

Her resolve began to falter. Then it nearly crumbled.

Kron took Kelley to lunch.

"She painted a picture of a life of a person who had a child with special needs. She told me how it would be painful, it would be taxing, it would be strenuous and stressful. She told me it would financially drain me, that my children would suffer because of it," Kelley remembers.

Kelley had a counter offer. "In a weak moment I asked her to tell them that for $15,000 I would consider going forward with the termination," she said.

But as soon as she got in the car to go home, she regretted it, Kelley said.

Kron let Kelley know the parents had refused to pay $15,000. By that point, it didn't matter to Kelley -- she'd decided against abortion no matter what. Kron sent her an e-mail asking if she'd scheduled the appointment for the abortion.

Kelley wrote back a one-word answer: no.

'TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE'

On February 22, 2012, six days after the fateful ultrasound, Kelley received a letter. The parents had hired a lawyer.

"You are obligated to terminate this pregnancy immediately," wrote Douglas Fishman, an attorney in West Hartford, Connecticut. "You have squandered precious time."

On March 5, Kelley would be 24 weeks pregnant, and after that, she couldn't legally abort the pregnancy, he said.

"TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE," he wrote.

Fishman reminded Kelley that she'd signed a contract, agreeing to "abortion in case of severe fetus abnormality." The contract did not define what constituted such an abnormality.

Kelley was in breach of contract, he wrote, and if she did not abort, the parents would sue her to get back the fees they'd already paid her -- around $8,000 -- plus all of the medical expenses and legal fees.

Fishman did not return phone calls and e-mails from CNN.

Kelley decided it was time to get her own attorney.

Michael DePrimo, an attorney in Hamden, Connecticut, took the case for free. He explained that no matter what the contract said, she couldn't be forced to have an abortion.

DePrimo sent an e-mail to Fishman, the parents' lawyer, stating that Kelley was not going to have an abortion.

"Ms. Kelley was more than willing to abort this fetus if the dollars were right," Fishman shot back.

"The not-so-subtle insinuation that Ms. Kelley attempted to extort money from your clients is unfounded and reprehensible," DePrimo responded. "If you wish to propose a solution to this unspeakable tragedy, I will listen and apprize (sic)my client accordingly."

"However, as I mentioned in my previous correspondence, abortion is off the table and will not be considered under any circumstance," he said.

Carrying babies for my brother

A secret flight

In an affidavit filed in Connecticut Superior Court, DePrimo described what happened next.

DePrimo received a phone call from Fishman telling him the parents had changed their minds. They now planned to exercise their legal right to take custody of their child -- and then immediately after birth surrender her to the state of Connecticut. She would become a ward of the state.

DePrimo explained to Kelley that this was no empty threat. Under state law, they were the parents, not her, and under Connecticut's Safe Haven Act for Newborns, parents can voluntarily give up custody of a baby less than a month old without being arrested for child abandonment.

Kelley couldn't stand the thought of the baby in foster care. She'd heard the nightmare stories.

She felt like her back was up against the wall.

Her lawyer explained she could go to court and fight to get custody of the baby, or fight to appoint a guardian for the baby, but Connecticut law is very clear that the genetic parents are the legal parents, so she'd likely lose in court.

There was one more option, DePrimo told her. She could go to a place where she, not the genetic parents, would be considered the baby's legal mother.

That place was 700 miles away.

Over the years, states have developed different laws about surrogacy. Some, like Connecticut, say the genetic parents -- the ones who supplied the sperm and the egg -- are the baby's legal parents. Other states don't recognize surrogacy contracts, and so the baby legally belongs to the woman who's carrying the baby.

On April 11, in her seventh month of pregnancy, Kelley and her daughters left for one of those states -- Michigan. While she was gassing up her car to leave, her lawyer informed the parents' lawyer about her plans.

"Once I realized that I was going to be the only person really fighting for her, that Mama bear instinct kicked in, and there was no way I was giving up without a fight," Kelley said.

Kelley chose Michigan because of its laws, but also its medicine: she'd been doing research on the baby's condition, and concluded C.S. Mott Children's Hospital at the University of Michigan had one of the best pediatric heart programs in the country.

When she arrived, she found an inexpensive summer sublet from a University of Michigan student and applied for Michigan Medicaid. She made appointments with a high-risk pregnancy specialist and a pediatric cardiologist and settled into life in Ann Arbor with her girls.

There was one thing left to do: She had to decide if she would keep the baby.

She was a single mother with no job and no permanent place to live, but she'd grown emotionally attached to the life inside her, and some days she wanted to keep her.

Kelley struggled, and finally decided she wasn't the right person to raise the child. But she knew who was: in her online research, she'd met other mothers of children with special needs. One of them had been particularly helpful, putting her in touch with support groups and sharing stories and photos of her own children -- both biological and adopted -- with medical problems.

The woman and her husband helped Kelley pack up to move to Michigan, and gave her emotional support as well.

"While it is true that (the baby) will face some life-long challenges, it is also true that it is also more than possible for her to have a wonderful life and to thrive," the mother wrote to Kelley in an e-mail. "I am sorry that (her) biological parents have abandoned their daughter and left you navigating this new, unexpected journey as the sole person bearing responsibility for (her) well-being and care."

Kelley asked the couple to adopt the baby.

They said yes. The baby now had a home, and it would be undisputed.

Or so Kelley thought.

An unexpected challenge

Kelley hadn't heard from the biological parents in months when in May, about one month before the baby's due date, the parents filed in Connecticut Superior Court for parental rights. They wanted to be the legal parents. They wanted their names on the birth certificate.

The legal papers included a stunning admission: the wife was not the baby's genetic mother -- they'd used an anonymous egg donor.

The case had now become very complicated. The lawyers were still negotiating about who would be the legal parents when the baby was born June 25.

She was full-term and six pounds nine ounces, but she wasn't breathing. Her body was limp and blue. Her heart rate was dangerously low.

The pediatricians pumped oxygen into her tiny lungs, and in about 20 seconds her heart rate went up to normal. She breathed on her own. Her color normalized.

"Infant appears to be moving all extremities and crying appropriately," the medical record stated.

Kelley's name went on the birth certificate. Kelley said she left the space for the father's name blank.

Three weeks later, the two sides struck a deal: The father agreed to give up his paternal rights as long as he and his wife could keep in touch with the adoptive family about the baby's health. Since then, the couple has visited the baby. The father has held her.

"They do care about her well-being. They do care about how she's doing," the adoptive mother said.

A long list of med problems -- and an infectious smile

The baby's medical problems turned out to be much more extensive than the ultrasound at Hartford Hospital had revealed.

She has a birth defect called holoprosencephaly, where the brain fails to completely divide into distinct hemispheres. She has heterotaxy, which means many of her internal organs, such as her liver and stomach, are in the wrong places. She has at least two spleens, neither of which works properly. Her head is very small, her right ear is misshapen, she has a cleft lip and a cleft palate, and a long list of complex heart defects, among other problems.

Baby S. -- her adoptive parents are comfortable using her first initial -- has a long road in front of her. She's already had one open-heart surgery and surgery on her intestines, and in the next year she'll need one or two more cardiac surgeries in addition to procedures to repair her cleft lip and palate. Later in childhood she'll need surgeries on her jaw and ear and more heart surgeries.

Her adoptive parents, who asked to remain anonymous to protect their family's privacy, know Baby S. might not be with them for long. The cardiac procedures she needs are risky, and her heterotaxy and holoprosencephaly, though mild, carry a risk of early death, according to doctors.

If Baby S. does survive, there's a 50% chance she won't be able to walk, talk or use her hands normally.

In some ways, Baby S. looks different from other 8-month-olds babies. In addition to the facial abnormalities, she's very small, weighing only 11 pounds and she gets food through a tube directly into her stomach so she'll grow faster.

Her adoptive parents know some people look at her and see a baby born to suffer -- a baby who's suffering could have been prevented with an abortion.

But that's not the way they see it. They see a little girl who's defied the odds, who constantly surprises her doctors with what she's able to do -- make eye contact, giggle at her siblings, grab toys, eye strangers warily.

"S. wakes up every single morning with an infectious smile. She greets her world with a constant sense of enthusiasm," her mother said in an e-mail to CNN. "Ultimately, we hold onto a faith that in providing S. with love, opportunity, encouragement, she will be the one to show us what is possible for her life and what she is capable of achieving."

Savior or Satan?

Just as there are two ways to look at Baby S., there are two ways to look at Crystal Kelley, the woman who carried her.

In one view, she's a saint who fought at great personal sacrifice for an unborn child whose own parents did not want her to live. In another view, she recklessly absconded with someone else's child and brought into the world a baby who faces serious medical challenges when that wasn't her decision to make.

Kelley knows some people hate her.

She's blogged about Baby S., and many readers, especially other surrogates, have attacked her.

"I can't tell you how many people told me that I was bad, that I was wrong, that I should go have an abortion, that I would be ****** to hell," she said.

In the end, she feels like she did the right thing.

"No one else was feeling this pregnancy the way that I was. No one else could feel her kicking and moving around inside," she said. "I knew from the beginning that this little girl had an amazing fighting spirit, and whatever challenges were thrown at her, she would go at them with every ounce of spirit that she could possibly have."

"No matter what anybody told me, I became her mother."

Check out the latest news from CNN.com
__________________


You think the only people who are people, are the people who look and think like you, but if you walk the footsteps of stranger, you'll learn things you knew... you never knew.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
May 29th, 2013, 12:06 PM
ratladee's Avatar Madison Marie, My Sweet P
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Fort Leavenworth, KS
Posts: 3,386
I think she did the right thing. There is a chance she can still live a normal life and make it through this. Everyone deserves a chance, you can't just give up on life so easily.
angelsailor288 likes this.
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #3  
May 29th, 2013, 01:38 PM
*Leslie*'s Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ohio
Posts: 3,966
Send a message via AIM to *Leslie* Send a message via Yahoo to *Leslie*
She should have never entered into a surrogacy agreement that included possible abortion if she would never consider having one. Any lawyer worth anything would have included a more specific criteria of what the circumstances for an abortion would be.
It doesn't sound like this women was doing surrogacy for the right reasons, it sounds like she was in desperate need of money. If she hadn't been, she wouldn't have been in a rush and would have taken her time finding the right couple rather than being worried about the inconvenience of being pregnant during the summer months. It's also funny that her lawyer used the term "reprehensible" in regards to her request for money. She's the one that counter-offered and then all of the sudden she expects people to believe that she didn't really want more money. Bottom line is, it wasn't her place to determine what constituted abortion as it wasn't her child to make the choice for.
MindyRambo likes this.
__________________


TTC our Rainbow Baby to complete our family.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
May 29th, 2013, 01:47 PM
ratladee's Avatar Madison Marie, My Sweet P
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Fort Leavenworth, KS
Posts: 3,386
It may not have been her child but it is her body and isn't that what all them pro choice people are about? Her body her choice? A contract or no contract, when it's someone's life I think it's perfectly acceptable to have a change of heart. Many people don't know whether they are for or against abortion until they are put in that situation. A human life trumps a stupid piece of paper any day. She took care of it, the donor parents should have just left it alone after that, after all they weren't the ones that had to worry about the child anyway.
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #5  
May 29th, 2013, 01:55 PM
*Leslie*'s Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ohio
Posts: 3,966
Send a message via AIM to *Leslie* Send a message via Yahoo to *Leslie*
Quote:
Originally Posted by ratladee View Post
It may not have been her child but it is her body and isn't that what all them pro choice people are about? Her body her choice? A contract or no contract, when it's someone's life I think it's perfectly acceptable to have a change of heart. Many people don't know whether they are for or against abortion until they are put in that situation. A human life trumps a stupid piece of paper any day. She took care of it, the donor parents should have just left it alone after that, after all they weren't the ones that had to worry about the child anyway.
Someone that enters a surrogacy contract should have a pretty good idea whether or not they are for or against abortion and/or under what circumstances. This isn't a simple matter of her body/her choice. This is a situation that is a gray area because there are legal issues. She used her body to get pregnant by a man that went into it with certain expectation. When she signed the contract, she gave the rights to them to decide. These parents aren't monsters, shoot they are in the child's life now. It wasn't legally her choice and her leaving the state is absolutely wrong. It's stories like her that leave a bad taste in peoples mouths about surrogacy.
MindyRambo likes this.
__________________


TTC our Rainbow Baby to complete our family.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
May 30th, 2013, 08:35 AM
Quantum_Leap's Avatar frequent flier
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Seattle area, Washington
Posts: 9,739
Quote:
Originally Posted by lesliek0211 View Post
Bottom line is, it wasn't her place to determine what constituted abortion as it wasn't her child to make the choice for.
I thought that the whole point of the pro-choice argument was that it's not about the child's life at all, it's about the woman's body. In the past, people on here have used that reasoning as rationale for why the biological father never has any say over whether or not his partner chooses to have an abortion (even though the child is just as much his as it is the mother's, the mother's body doesn't belong to him, so he doesn't get to choose what she does with it).

Under no circumstances do I think a woman can or should be legally compelled to have an abortion. We don't live in communist China. That's an extremely dangerous road to go down.

Your reasoning here seems to be moving away from "pro-choice" and more towards simply "pro-abortion."
__________________

Thank you to the SSMC makers for my beautiful siggies!

(x2)(x2)(October 2011)
Reply With Quote
  #7  
May 30th, 2013, 03:12 PM
ratladee's Avatar Madison Marie, My Sweet P
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Fort Leavenworth, KS
Posts: 3,386
I don't think anyone willing to go into a surrogacy would even expect that this would happen. I mean someone is willing to pay you to have their baby. This circumstance is probably extremely rare.
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #8  
May 30th, 2013, 05:37 PM
*Leslie*'s Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ohio
Posts: 3,966
Send a message via AIM to *Leslie* Send a message via Yahoo to *Leslie*
I don't know how this could be construed as pro-abortion. This is a legal gray area. It isn't simply a matter of her body/her choice because there are a myriad of other factors involved here as well as other legalities. I'm not saying she should have been held down and forced to have an abortion, but I find her actions to be in very poor character. This is why surrogates shouldn't do it in a hurry, on whim, desperate for money, etc. It's also why they should go through a lengthy process and understand all of the legalities in general and of the contract they are signing. She didn't do what she signed up for, period. She should have to reimburse the parents their fees at the very least.
MindyRambo likes this.
__________________


TTC our Rainbow Baby to complete our family.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
May 30th, 2013, 07:13 PM
plan4fate's Avatar I may bend, but not break
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 26,086
Send a message via MSN to plan4fate
Quote:
Originally Posted by lesliek0211 View Post
I don't know how this could be construed as pro-abortion. This is a legal gray area. It isn't simply a matter of her body/her choice because there are a myriad of other factors involved here as well as other legalities. I'm not saying she should have been held down and forced to have an abortion, but I find her actions to be in very poor character. This is why surrogates shouldn't do it in a hurry, on whim, desperate for money, etc. It's also why they should go through a lengthy process and understand all of the legalities in general and of the contract they are signing. She didn't do what she signed up for, period. She should have to reimburse the parents their fees at the very least.
That's another very grey area. What things happening would result in her having to give back the fee? Refusing to terminate? Having to terminate against the parents wishes.. say for medical reasons for her own life? Should a woman have to choose between the fee and her own health?
__________________
~TTC #1 together 2 years and counting ~


Awesome siggy made by Jaidynsmum
Matthew and Mark 08/24/2005 9w1d, Mattie Anne 04/07/2008 8w Mel and Dee 01/19/2010 (8 weeks) and 5 chemical pregnancies
Hope 07/22/2012@4w1d,Konnor 11/24/2012@3w6d,"Emmy"1/15/2013@ 3w6d,Ronen 02/10/2013@3w5d,Joy 07/19/2013@3w6d, "Pea" 09/06/2013@ 3w3d


Hashimoto's Thyroiditis, PCOS, Insulin resistant.
150mcg Synthyroid, 500mg Metformin (aiming for 1500mg)
Reply With Quote
  #10  
May 30th, 2013, 10:28 PM
Quantum_Leap's Avatar frequent flier
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Seattle area, Washington
Posts: 9,739
Quote:
Originally Posted by lesliek0211 View Post
It's also why they should go through a lengthy process and understand all of the legalities in general and of the contract they are signing. She didn't do what she signed up for, period. She should have to reimburse the parents their fees at the very least.
I agree with you to an extent, but at the same time, the entire issue of surrogacy is very much a legal wasteland. Laws vary WIDELY from state to state, and in many states surrogacy contracts are not legal and not enforceable. In some states, individuals can be heavily fined for even trying to create them. In Connecticut (where the contract in this article was originally formed) there are no state laws regulating surrogacy contracts (which is true in many states). Other courts in Connecticut have previously ruled in favor of the biological parents when there have been custody disputes involving surrogates, but so what? The law is still very unclear.

Quote:
Connecticut – Surrogacy law in Connecticut is uncertain, but favorable. The statutes are silent with regard to surrogacy agreements, but various cases have looked favorably on such agreements, including a case concerning a same-sex couple.
Surrogacy Laws by State

I'll grant you that the woman in this article did enter into a contract where she agreed to have an abortion in the case of "severe fetal abnormality," but if that contract was itself illegal, then even once it's breached there's nothing that can be done. In a similar vein, in no state can I legally enter into a contract to become someone else's slave. Even if I willingly signed a piece of paper to that effect, the paper is meaningless, because our government doesn't think that this is the type of agreement people should be permitted to make. (And I agree.) The analogy here to abortion clauses in surrogacy contracts is very clear. You can't ever legally sign your body over to someone else -- but if you sign a paper that says you will allow someone else to decide whether or not you have an abortion in the future, then that is exactly what you are trying to do! This shouldn't be permissible. Perhaps this woman's situation was necessary as a test case to show WHY it shouldn't be permissible.
__________________

Thank you to the SSMC makers for my beautiful siggies!

(x2)(x2)(October 2011)
Reply With Quote
  #11  
June 1st, 2013, 08:01 AM
*Leslie*'s Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ohio
Posts: 3,966
Send a message via AIM to *Leslie* Send a message via Yahoo to *Leslie*
That's a good point. I know the laws vary, but I am not familiar with them. There needs to be much more done in the way fixing these laws to prevent these situations. Regardless of the legalities, I find her actions in poor character because even if the contract wasn't legal, she entered into it and her intentions were less than stellar.
__________________


TTC our Rainbow Baby to complete our family.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
June 4th, 2013, 08:35 AM
MindyRambo's Avatar Super Mommy
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Quebec, Canada
Posts: 799
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quantum_Leap View Post
I thought that the whole point of the pro-choice argument was that it's not about the child's life at all, it's about the woman's body. In the past, people on here have used that reasoning as rationale for why the biological father never has any say over whether or not his partner chooses to have an abortion (even though the child is just as much his as it is the mother's, the mother's body doesn't belong to him, so he doesn't get to choose what she does with it).

Under no circumstances do I think a woman can or should be legally compelled to have an abortion. We don't live in communist China. That's an extremely dangerous road to go down.

Your reasoning here seems to be moving away from "pro-choice" and more towards simply "pro-abortion."
Yup, exactly, which is why she shouldn't have SIGNED A CONTRACT indicating so. Whether the contract was enforceable or not, why would you sign something you were so against? It may be rare, but obviously not that rare if they thought to put it into the contract.

And I get that a life is worth more than a "piece of paper" but when it IS a legally binding contract that she willingly signed that's something altogether different than someone who didn't plan a pregnancy and is carrying their own baby. Why wouldn't she have told them at that point that she couldn't sign it in good concience with that clause in it?
__________________


You think the only people who are people, are the people who look and think like you, but if you walk the footsteps of stranger, you'll learn things you knew... you never knew.

Last edited by MindyRambo; June 4th, 2013 at 08:39 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
June 7th, 2013, 07:46 AM
Missa_Mae's Avatar First Time Mommy!
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 3,055
What an incredible story.

I can see grey areas everywhere. It was her body - her choice but NOT her fetus. Who is to determine who is right in that situation? Certainly not a piece of paper.

At the same time, if she knew she couldn't take custody of this baby & care for it, then maybe it was up to the biological parents to decide what is best?

What a tough tough situation that I hope to never be in. I don't think any woman goes into surrogacy thinking about termination ...
__________________
Sweet Child of Mine



Co-Host of the April 2013 Playroom

Reply With Quote
  #14  
July 7th, 2013, 09:18 PM
angelsailor288's Avatar Platinum Supermommy
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Kingston, NY
Posts: 5,046
I think she did the right thing. The baby girl is alive and loved. Thats all that matters.
__________________

Thank you jaidynsmum for my siggy!





Reply With Quote
  #15  
August 4th, 2013, 06:24 PM
Keepin' it real!
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,655
Krystal (They have it spelled wrong, but she doesn't bother to correct anymore, lol) is a pretty nice person actually, and I think did the best she could with the circumstances. From what I understand, she is trying to get a book written about her experience, but is being belittled in many ways. Most of the surrogates I know do not like her, but they have never PERSONALLY spoken to her. They just read her previous blog and decided she was wrong and never heard her side. There was a LOT wrong with the journey in general, steps she should have completed, but she didn't. Even if she had, her IP's would have asked her to abort. There was NO stopping them. She tried everything. They didn't want a SN child. They wanted a "perfect" baby. Now, the child did have some pretty severe issues, but is loved by an adoptive family that took her on. She's a sweetie. IDK if she will ever open up pics to the public, but knowing her personally, she's actually pretty normal person. She has kids of her own, and is just trying to make it like everyone else. I think the book isn't the worst thing if it helps her to tell her story, but I do feel as though there are those who will try to exploit the situation further and make surrogacy look bad (as if we don't have enough bad stories out there!). I have told her that she should be VERY careful who she talks to (Dr. Phil was one, IDK if that's in the works) because people have a way of twisting words.

I hope she listens and picks the right person for her true story to get out there.
__________________
Lynn
Mom to many



1 Girl 2011 and 1 Boy 2013. Their family is COMPLETE!

Surrogacy # 3 for new family?: 2014??
Reply With Quote
Reply

Topic Tools Search this Topic
Search this Topic:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:02 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0