An article titled “Baby M and the Question of Surrogate Motherhood,” discusses the oldest court case involving surrogacy. In this case, the surrogate mother, Mary Beth Whitehead, decided that she did not want to give away the baby she had carried the past nine months. The couple that had hired Whitehead as a surrogate went to court to get their baby back and their case prevailed. The author of the article, Clyde Haberman seems to be unbiased and takes no stance on the issue. He does however bring up that although it is banned in some states, there is no national policy in place regarding surrogacy. I am going to argue that it would be morally correct to ban surrogacy completely.
Emmanuel Kant’s categorical imperative says “act so that you treat humanity, whether your own person or in that of another, always as an end and never as a means only,” (Parks 12). Surrogacy uses a woman’s body as a means to have a baby. Surrogacy in theory, takes a woman’s body, harms it through gestation and childbirth, and then lets the woman continue on after being harmed. A surrogate goes through pain and suffering and gets nothing because the baby she created is taken away from her. Surrogacy then is morally wrong because it uses a woman as a means.
Surrogates are compensated for their work, but there are a lot of moral issues that come with the process. First off, surrogacy in America is very expensive and not everyone can afford it. It is a violation of inequality to give some couples opportunities that are not universal. Another issue that arises is picking a surrogate mother. People with more money can afford to hire prettier or smarter surrogates. Paying more for brains or beauty can be seen as selfish or bad parenting, because it is paying for...
... middle of paper ...
..., who otherwise may not be able to have children on their own, it is morally wrong. It uses a woman’s body as a machine and as a means, and women are bound to agree to surrogacy for the wrong reasons. Surrogacy is morally wrong because of the emotional trauma it can bring to the surrogate after the birth of the child. With all of these negative aspects, it is clear that other options should be considered, options such as adoptions, which have more benefits than losses.
Works Cited
Haberman, Clyde. "Baby M and the Question of Surrogate Motherhood." The New York Times. The New York Times, 23 Mar. 2014. Web. 24 Mar. 2014.
Steinbock, Bonnie. "Payment for Egg Donation and Surrogacy." Bioethics in a Changing World. By Jennifer A. Parks and Victoria S. Wike. 1st ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2010. 400-09. Print.
We Can’t Forget Kant. Chapter 12. Sakai reading.
Surrogate pregnancy was talked about and questioned in the early 1970’s but was not put into practice until 1976. The first case documented actually comes from the bible. It was the story of Abraham and Sarah. Sarah talks about her experience with infertility. She then turns to Hagar, her handmaiden, and asks her if she would carry their child for them since she was unable to. Hagar was their maid so in a way it was a command, not exactly a favor or question.
Kemp, Joe. “Fetus of pregnant, brain-dead Texas woman ‘distinctly abnormal’: lawyers.” NYDailyNews. New York Daily News. 23 Jan. 2014. Web. 08 Feb. 2014.
Couples experiencing infertility issues now have a number of options at their disposal from in-vitro fertilization to intrauterine insemination or going as far as using a surrogate and donor eggs or donor sperm. Technology has made it possible for someone to experience the joy of parenthood regardless of whether they can naturally conceive children. All of these procedures come with their own ethical questions and pros and cons. One of the biggest moral dilemmas is what to do with the left-over embryos still in storage when a family has decided they have had enough children. Most couples see this ethical quandary because they recognize that the embryos are whole human beings and do not think it is morally right to dispose
A surrogacy is the carrying of a pregnancy for intended parents. There are two kinds of surrogacy: “Gestational”, in which the egg and sperm belong to the intended parents and is carried by the surrogate, and “traditional”, where the surrogate is inseminated with the intended father’s sperm. Regardless of the method, I believe that surrogacy cannot be morally justified. Surrogacy literally means “substitute”, or “replacement”. A surrogate is a replacement for a mother for that 9-month period of pregnancy, and therefore is reducing the role of the surrogate mother to an oversimplified and dehumanizing labor. The pregnancy process for the gestational mother can be very physically and mentally demanding, and is unique because after birthing the
I would have said that it was a generous and thoughtful act of kindness for a surrogate to be willing to help a couple bring a child into this world. I would have never thought deeply about some of the moral and ethical aspects of surrogacy, until now. I have been married for almost four years, and I believe in the unity of marriage and the idea of becoming one. After reading Cahill’s argument on surrogacy, and reflected on my own moral values, I immediately took a stance to agree with her. I believe that when it comes to a child, the best interest of the child should be a top priority. I am not a mother, but I am very passionate about children, and find their lives to be so precious. Parents should always have the child’s best interest in mind when making choices regarding their child’s life. A surrogate may be doing it as an act of kindness, and that may be her intention. However, I agree that surrogacy brings a dualistic element to the relationship. I know that as a married woman I would never hire a surrogate to bear my child, nor be a surrogate to carry someone else’s child. I want children, but I would never want to be treated as the means to an end, and I would not want my child to be considered a commodity. I strongly agree with Cahill in that a binding moral obligation does come with certain choices, even if we did not choose them in the first
Many studies have been done pertaining to egg donation and its medical aspect, but very few studies shows the ethical implications of egg donations. Health Laws such as Fertility Clinic Success Rate and Certification Act,1992 regulates the advertisement of success rate of fertility clinic. Only few states have federal laws for informed consent from egg donors (1-3). Informed consent means that donor understands all the minor details surrounding the egg donation procedure, its side-effects- medical, legal, ethical and emotional and gives permission to undergo the procedure without hesitation or coercion.
Abortion, which is defined as a deliberate termination of a human pregnancy, is one of the most controversial issues in society. Many people believe that abortion is unethical and morally wrong, while others believe that it is a woman’s right to decide what to do with her body. According to www.census.gov, “the number of abortions performed annually in the U.S. has leveled off at 1.2 million a year” (1). This statistic supports how many women are choosing abortion. Although abortion is legal in the United States, many people continue to voice their opinions on how it is a human rights violation and should be illegal everywhere. The practice of abortion should be banned in society because it terminates the life of an innocent unborn child, causes long-term emotional effects, as well as major health risks for women who opt for abortion.
Ricci, Mariella Lombardi. "Assisted Procreation And Its Relationship To Genetics And Eugenics." Human Reproduction & Genetic Ethics 15.1 (2009): 9-29. Academic Search Complete. Web. 9 Apr. 2014.
The addition of a child into a family’s home is a happy occasion. Unfortunately, some families are unable to have a child due to unforeseen problems, and they must pursue other means than natural pregnancy. Some couples adopt and other couples follow a different path; they utilize in vitro fertilization or surrogate motherhood. The process is complicated, unreliable, but ultimately can give the parents the gift of a child they otherwise could not have had. At the same time, as the process becomes more and more advanced and scientists are able to predict the outcome of the technique, the choice of what child is born is placed in the hands of the parents. Instead of waiting to see if the child had the mother’s eyes, the father’s hair or Grandma’s heart problem, the parents and doctors can select the best eggs and the best sperm to create the perfect child. Many see the rise of in vitro fertilization as the second coming of the Eugenics movement of the 19th and early 20th century. A process that is able to bring joy to so many parents is also seen as deciding who is able to reproduce and what child is worthy of birthing.
Surrogacy is becoming extremely popular as a way for people to build their families and women to have a source of income. Many people have various reasons for their opposition to it whether it be by comparing it to prostitution or disagreeing with how military wives take advantage of the Tricare insurance. Lorraine Ali states in her article “The Curious Lives of Surrogates” that one of the more popular reasons to oppose surrogacy is that it contradicts, “what we’ve always thought of as an unbreakable bond between mother and child.” However, a woman’s inability to conceive her own children does not determine the absence of a mother to child bond.
Gestational surrogacy, especially when it involves commercial surrogates, challenges the status quo in the ethical theory of reproduction, because with this technology the process of producing a child can no longer remain a private matter. Now a public contract exists between two parties, the couple and the surrogate ...
"Reproductive Technologies." Bioethics for Students: How Do We Know What’s Right?, edited by Steven G. Post, vol. 1, Macmillan Reference USA, 1999. Opposing Viewpoints in
Arguments against commercial surrogacy typically revolve around the idea that surrogacy is a form of child-selling. Critics believe that commercial surrogacy violates both women’s and children’s rights. In addition, by making surrogacy contracts legally enforceable, courts will follow the contract rather than choose what is best for the child. However, in her article “Surrogate Mothering: Exploring Empowerment” Laura Pudry is not convinced by these arguments.
Commercial surrogacy commodifies children because by paying the surrogate mother to give up her child, they treat the child as an object of exchange or commodity that can be bought and sold. As any business transaction, the parents give money for the exchange of an object, the child. The parents get their desired child and the mother gets the money, but what about what thee child think about this event? The parents and surrogate mother’s action were done with self-interest. It could be argued that they wanted the best for the child. However, the first priority in the intentional procreation of the child was not the welfare of the child but rather to give it up to the parents in exchange of money. Additionally, women’s labor is commodified because the surrogate mother treats her parental rights as it was a property right not as a trust. In other words, the decisions taken concerning the child are not done primarily for the benefit of the child. The act of the mother relenting her parental rights is done for a monetary price. She disposes of her parental rights, which are to be managed for the welfare of the owner, as if they were property right, which are to be handled for personal
Stevens, John, and Nazia Parveen. "I've Been Refused IVF Because My Fiance Is Already a Father, Reveals Heartbroken Woman." Mail Online. N.p., 1 Nov. 2013