4 ms·

While I appreciate there's a lot of new debates to work through, the possibility of a child with two same-sex parents would be revolutionary for gay and lesbian

by troad 3y ago

While I appreciate there's a lot of new debates to work through, the possibility of a child with two same-sex parents would be revolutionary for gay and lesbian couples. It's striking how many commenters here thus far default to treating this as a college ethics question, concocting contorted hypotheticals.

contrl 3y ago
[flagged]
- troad 3y ago
  I don't know what you expect to achieve by calling those selfless women who choose to do surrogacy prostitutes. The surrogacy sector in the United States is highly regulated, and surrogates are highly protected (https://health.ny.gov/community/pregnancy/surrogacy/surrogate_bill_of_rights.htm https://health.ny.gov/community/pregnancy/surrogacy/surrogat...). Yours is an ignorant, misogynistic stance.
  - runsWphotons 3y ago
    Most surrogates are not selfless--- they get paid for what they do...in the US often $60,000. Some jurisdictions do require that women choosing surrogacy have to do it altruistically, receiving only reimbursement for medical expenses. This causes a shortage of surrogates compared to market demand. People looking for surrogates often then travel to jurisdictions where the laws are different to obtain them (I know people personally who have done this). The US is not the only destination, and there are less protections in other markets than in the US. Surrogacy is certainly not prostitution, but poorly regulated markets exist and pose similar issues.
    - troad 3y ago
      > Poorly regulated markets exist and pose similar issues. Right, but this sort of applies to anything though. Labour markets, for example. Does the fact that Bangladeshi clothes factories are exploitative of their staff make hiring staff intrinsically immoral in the United States? > Most surrogates are not selfless--- they get paid for what they do...in the US often $60,000. Including the lead-up and recovery period to take the whole process to a year or so, and accepting your very high estimate of $60k in surrogate compensation, that's hardly a windfall for the average American woman. There's far easier ways to earn $60k in an entire year in the US than carrying someone's baby. For American surrogates, there's usually an element of selflessness involved.
      - Teever 3y ago
        Soon to be an outdated discussion: https://blogs.bmj.com/medical-humanities/2020/03/03/ectogenesis-at-home-artificial-wombs-and-access-to-care/ https://blogs.bmj.com/medical-humanities/2020/03/03/ectogene...
        runsWphotons 3y ago
        "The last several years have seen significant progress toward the development of an artificial womb which would facilitate the survival and growth of prematurely born fetuses from approximately 23-24 weeks gestation onward." Seems a long way from eliminating the need for surrogacy.
  - contrl 3y ago
    Being critical of the surrogacy industry treating women like cattle means that I'm misogynistic? What sort of logic led you to that conclusion? As for the harms of surrogacy, here's a good article that explains what's really happening, it's not the rosy picture you're painting: https://thecritic.co.uk/end-womb-trafficking https://thecritic.co.uk/end-womb-trafficking
    - troad 3y ago
      A) Denying the agency of women to make their own choices is by definition misogynistic. Asserting that when women make choices you don't agree with, it must be due to exploitation, is likewise misogynistic. Paternalistic too. Hardly the vocab of women's lib. B) Somehow I doubt I'll be getting a particularly balanced take from a website called 'the critic slash end womb trafficking'. Julie Bindel is a fiery political opinion columnist - the Ann Coulter of radical feminism - and the article you link is brazenly polemical. I could respond with my own polemical links which counter yours, but I honestly don't see what the point of that exchange would be. It sounds like surrogacy is a culture war issue for you, which is sad, because the culture war is a parasite on good intentions. Here are the legal protections for surrogates in the state of New York: https://health.ny.gov/community/pregnancy/surrogacy/surrogate_bill_of_rights.htm https://health.ny.gov/community/pregnancy/surrogacy/surrogat....
      - contrl 3y ago
        Your definition of misogyny is far too narrow then, if you're focusing entirely on the concept of individual agency, yet ignoring the larger structural inequalities and power dynamics that constrain women's choices and perpetuate exploitation. Did you actually read the article I linked, or are you just complaining about the URL? If you did read it, do you dispute the factual content that describes several examples of exploitation of women in the surrogacy industry? Complaining that a woman has a strong opinion is a rather odd criticism, Julie Bindel has been actively researching surrogacy and its harms for many, many years now and it would be very surprising if she wasn't opinionated on this topic. Just because there are some regulations in place doesn't mean that exploitation doesn't occur. The fact remains that surrogacy often involves financial transactions where women's bodies are being used as a means to an end. It is not at all misogynistic to critically examine this.
runsWphotons 3y ago
This technology goes way beyond that. I don't see why we should dismiss the many valid ethics questions because it is something that some gay people want. That may be a slight positive to weigh against all the other questions.
- troad 3y ago
  I fully agree that we ought not dismiss valid ethics questions. These should by all means be discussed, and - as with any reproductive tech - they will be, before anything like this ever rolls out. I don't think "but yeah what if you steal rich people cells and make a baby and then totally blackmail them" is quite the ethical quandary some people seem to think it is, however. It's clear to whom this is a purely navel-gazing academic exercise, and to whom this offers life-changing possibilities.
  - runsWphotons 3y ago
    Among other things, this vastly increases the potential for artificial selection of embryos using PGS, for which there are already companies operating publicly (and dark groups operating privately). Concern over this isn't just "navel gazing" and should be weighed against the positives. There are a hundred of other questions which are valid concerns and your original comment seems dismissive of these. Yes some of us jokes about stealing celebrity DNA but it is hardly the only question.
    - troad 3y ago
      Right, so we agree, there's valid ethical issues to consider and be balanced against one another. Seems like you're trying to go for a bit of a motte and bailey argument here. The issue you raise is valid, but it isn't the one being raised in the other comments, which is making celebrity babies for the purposes of blackmail, and it isn't the one my comment was aimed at.
  - jeroenhd 3y ago
    Women have tried to impregnate themselves with disposed condoms before. Some people are just crazy like that. It's rare that this happens, but the law should have a provision for this case before this technology can be used without repercussions. Not only because of the question of "who's the father" but also because of laws forcing biological parents to pay child support, for example, regardless of how the child came to be.
samtho 3y ago
The only real “new” issue that would come out of this is the hypothetical problem of stealing DNA from someone else to create a gamete. Granted, this technology is still very much in its infancy and, while the promise implied here is that you can create the gamete from any cell, in practicality, it may require a good quality sample of a specific kind of cell to reliably make this happen. As someone who is active in the Donor Conceived Community, being a product of donor sperm, this process would remove a lot of trauma from the offspring of these arrangements. A big problem is that a lot of offspring did not receive the benefit from genetic mirroring which causes some issues when the child is not informed at the earliest age. Some of these problems stemming from this trauma include developing trust issues, feeling of not belonging, and even a poor ability to recognize faces later in life. There’s also the problem with large sibling groups even to this very day due to fragmented rules and sparse regulations. Growing up with genetic family does prevent the bulk, if not all, of complaints fielded by offspring such as myself. This is it something parents, both perspective and current, never want to hear because it’s upsetting, uncomfortable, and it’s a threat to their self. If they accept this, they accept that no matter what they do, they may never be good enough if using an anonymous gamete donor. While this is not true if you take a child-centered approach, the conversation has usually ceased by now. Newborn babies are not a blank canvas for painting upon, nor do they exist to please and serve their parents. The DNA they are born with links them back to their biological parents and absence of one or both without that knowledge is trauma, unfortunately. The pedants are going to catastrophize with wild hypotheticals from their armchairs, but I know this can be transformative for many who seek gamete donation and greatly beneficial to their offspring who are born with this technology.

by troad 3y ago

contrl 3y ago

[flagged]

troad 3y ago
I don't know what you expect to achieve by calling those selfless women who choose to do surrogacy prostitutes. The surrogacy sector in the United States is highly regulated, and surrogates are highly protected (https://health.ny.gov/community/pregnancy/surrogacy/surrogate_bill_of_rights.htm https://health.ny.gov/community/pregnancy/surrogacy/surrogat...). Yours is an ignorant, misogynistic stance.
- runsWphotons 3y ago
  Most surrogates are not selfless--- they get paid for what they do...in the US often $60,000. Some jurisdictions do require that women choosing surrogacy have to do it altruistically, receiving only reimbursement for medical expenses. This causes a shortage of surrogates compared to market demand. People looking for surrogates often then travel to jurisdictions where the laws are different to obtain them (I know people personally who have done this). The US is not the only destination, and there are less protections in other markets than in the US. Surrogacy is certainly not prostitution, but poorly regulated markets exist and pose similar issues.
  - troad 3y ago
    > Poorly regulated markets exist and pose similar issues. Right, but this sort of applies to anything though. Labour markets, for example. Does the fact that Bangladeshi clothes factories are exploitative of their staff make hiring staff intrinsically immoral in the United States? > Most surrogates are not selfless--- they get paid for what they do...in the US often $60,000. Including the lead-up and recovery period to take the whole process to a year or so, and accepting your very high estimate of $60k in surrogate compensation, that's hardly a windfall for the average American woman. There's far easier ways to earn $60k in an entire year in the US than carrying someone's baby. For American surrogates, there's usually an element of selflessness involved.
    - Teever 3y ago
      Soon to be an outdated discussion: https://blogs.bmj.com/medical-humanities/2020/03/03/ectogenesis-at-home-artificial-wombs-and-access-to-care/ https://blogs.bmj.com/medical-humanities/2020/03/03/ectogene...
      - runsWphotons 3y ago
        "The last several years have seen significant progress toward the development of an artificial womb which would facilitate the survival and growth of prematurely born fetuses from approximately 23-24 weeks gestation onward." Seems a long way from eliminating the need for surrogacy.
- contrl 3y ago
  Being critical of the surrogacy industry treating women like cattle means that I'm misogynistic? What sort of logic led you to that conclusion? As for the harms of surrogacy, here's a good article that explains what's really happening, it's not the rosy picture you're painting: https://thecritic.co.uk/end-womb-trafficking https://thecritic.co.uk/end-womb-trafficking
  - troad 3y ago
    A) Denying the agency of women to make their own choices is by definition misogynistic. Asserting that when women make choices you don't agree with, it must be due to exploitation, is likewise misogynistic. Paternalistic too. Hardly the vocab of women's lib. B) Somehow I doubt I'll be getting a particularly balanced take from a website called 'the critic slash end womb trafficking'. Julie Bindel is a fiery political opinion columnist - the Ann Coulter of radical feminism - and the article you link is brazenly polemical. I could respond with my own polemical links which counter yours, but I honestly don't see what the point of that exchange would be. It sounds like surrogacy is a culture war issue for you, which is sad, because the culture war is a parasite on good intentions. Here are the legal protections for surrogates in the state of New York: https://health.ny.gov/community/pregnancy/surrogacy/surrogate_bill_of_rights.htm https://health.ny.gov/community/pregnancy/surrogacy/surrogat....
    - contrl 3y ago
      Your definition of misogyny is far too narrow then, if you're focusing entirely on the concept of individual agency, yet ignoring the larger structural inequalities and power dynamics that constrain women's choices and perpetuate exploitation. Did you actually read the article I linked, or are you just complaining about the URL? If you did read it, do you dispute the factual content that describes several examples of exploitation of women in the surrogacy industry? Complaining that a woman has a strong opinion is a rather odd criticism, Julie Bindel has been actively researching surrogacy and its harms for many, many years now and it would be very surprising if she wasn't opinionated on this topic. Just because there are some regulations in place doesn't mean that exploitation doesn't occur. The fact remains that surrogacy often involves financial transactions where women's bodies are being used as a means to an end. It is not at all misogynistic to critically examine this.

runsWphotons 3y ago

This technology goes way beyond that. I don't see why we should dismiss the many valid ethics questions because it is something that some gay people want. That may be a slight positive to weigh against all the other questions.

troad 3y ago
I fully agree that we ought not dismiss valid ethics questions. These should by all means be discussed, and - as with any reproductive tech - they will be, before anything like this ever rolls out. I don't think "but yeah what if you steal rich people cells and make a baby and then totally blackmail them" is quite the ethical quandary some people seem to think it is, however. It's clear to whom this is a purely navel-gazing academic exercise, and to whom this offers life-changing possibilities.
- runsWphotons 3y ago
  Among other things, this vastly increases the potential for artificial selection of embryos using PGS, for which there are already companies operating publicly (and dark groups operating privately). Concern over this isn't just "navel gazing" and should be weighed against the positives. There are a hundred of other questions which are valid concerns and your original comment seems dismissive of these. Yes some of us jokes about stealing celebrity DNA but it is hardly the only question.
  - troad 3y ago
    Right, so we agree, there's valid ethical issues to consider and be balanced against one another. Seems like you're trying to go for a bit of a motte and bailey argument here. The issue you raise is valid, but it isn't the one being raised in the other comments, which is making celebrity babies for the purposes of blackmail, and it isn't the one my comment was aimed at.
- jeroenhd 3y ago
  Women have tried to impregnate themselves with disposed condoms before. Some people are just crazy like that. It's rare that this happens, but the law should have a provision for this case before this technology can be used without repercussions. Not only because of the question of "who's the father" but also because of laws forcing biological parents to pay child support, for example, regardless of how the child came to be.

samtho 3y ago

The only real “new” issue that would come out of this is the hypothetical problem of stealing DNA from someone else to create a gamete. Granted, this technology is still very much in its infancy and, while the promise implied here is that you can create the gamete from any cell, in practicality, it may require a good quality sample of a specific kind of cell to reliably make this happen. As someone who is active in the Donor Conceived Community, being a product of donor sperm, this process would remove a lot of trauma from the offspring of these arrangements. A big problem is that a lot of offspring did not receive the benefit from genetic mirroring which causes some issues when the child is not informed at the earliest age. Some of these problems stemming from this trauma include developing trust issues, feeling of not belonging, and even a poor ability to recognize faces later in life. There’s also the problem with large sibling groups even to this very day due to fragmented rules and sparse regulations. Growing up with genetic family does prevent the bulk, if not all, of complaints fielded by offspring such as myself. This is it something parents, both perspective and current, never want to hear because it’s upsetting, uncomfortable, and it’s a threat to their self. If they accept this, they accept that no matter what they do, they may never be good enough if using an anonymous gamete donor. While this is not true if you take a child-centered approach, the conversation has usually ceased by now. Newborn babies are not a blank canvas for painting upon, nor do they exist to please and serve their parents. The DNA they are born with links them back to their biological parents and absence of one or both without that knowledge is trauma, unfortunately. The pedants are going to catastrophize with wild hypotheticals from their armchairs, but I know this can be transformative for many who seek gamete donation and greatly beneficial to their offspring who are born with this technology.