If adoption were abolished would you use a surrogate?

Question

If adoption were abolished would you use a surrogate?

Answer 1

Absolutely.  I love children, and I hope to have some someday, but I would happily use a surrogate if I couldn't adopt.  It doesn't matter how the child gets here-(as long as it's legal), as long as the child is loved and well taken care of once he or she arrives in my care.

Answer 2

What a silly question.

Google "childfree".

Answer 3

I am getting so upset about the thoughts here today about abolishing adoption-  what is so horribly wrong with adoption? Granted some adoptions are not handled correctly or some bad things can happen- but that happens in every area of life, even when you raise your biological child.  What ever happened to morality- would it be better to abolish adoption, and not abolish abortion?  Life vs death- I am sick of this talk

Answer 4

If I wanted a kid bad enough I would.  I

Answer 5

No.  I would foster or just keep working with the kids I work with now.  Or get another job working with kids.

I'm not adopting because I think a little human being can fulfill my every desire, or because I'm infertile.  I want a family, yes...but whatever I want, I examine it to make sure it's for the right reasons before I go out and get it.  Hubby and I spent 3 years making sure we were doing this right, and for the right reasons, before we even started the adoption process.  I think we can make a difference in some young people's lives (beyond what we already do for work).  But if this option wasn't open, we wouldn't be "incomplete" without it.

Answer 6

No, having a surrogate is not at all something we would ever consider.  

We are doing foster care and our goal is to help them reunify with their parents if that is possible, and if not adopt.  

As for infant agency adoption, it wasn't important to us to to have a baby and I don't like the idea that any child we potentially could have adopted that way, would be in anyway coerced.  So, no, that isn't the way we wanted to go either.  In foster care, the parents are given so many opportunities to get the children back, that coersion shouldn't be an issue.  

Speaking to those who think that just because your are infertle is Gods way to tell someone they shouldn't have children - I think you are way off.  Infertility/secondary infertility has nothing to do with how good of a parent you will be and reversed, just because you can have a baby doesn't mean you deserve or have the ability to take care of a child.  All children in foster care deserve the same love, emotional and financial support for a lifetime as all other children do.  

Having a baby doesn't make you a parent - raising a child does.

Answer 7

Well adoption wouldn’t be abolished. That is just a far out fantasy for some people, its not going to happen. I thought people want reform, why ask these what if questions even more when they will never come to pass. Again Adoption will not be abolished ever.

Answer 8

Well, that just opens up a bigger can of worms.  In India, they already pay women to bear children for others (it is being made illegal here).  Indians living in the US return home to farm for a surrogate.  It's just fine to threaten the health of another woman because you just can't bear the fact that God says you can't have kids. It  has quickly just become another way to exploit the poor.

Please note: My comment does not apply to family or friends who volunteer to help YOU personally.

Answer 9

Your starting to dig a bit too deep into the shady areas for me. I quit smoking last week so my mind is a bit behind.