Why don't infertile PAP's use a surrogate instead of adopting?

Question

(besides "all the starving children")

Answer 1

Because a surrogate is expensive.

Adoption from foster care is not.

Answer 2

Some do, and some don't.  But they do have the right to choose if they would rather use a surrogate or adopt.

Answer 3

Surrogacy is not always an option for every couple that is having trouble conceiving.  Not all surrogacies are where the baby is from the egg and sperm of the couple. Sometimes a donor egg has to be used sometimes the egg of the surrogate mother, or donor sperm has to be used. A couple might rather just adopt a child that is not biological related to either, then do go through a surrogacy or sperm donation  and have only one be biological related to the child. A couple might not want to see another woman carry their baby. A woman might not want to have to see another woman carry her husbands baby, when she desperately wanted to carry his child. The woman might fear that her husband or partner will fall for the surrogate, it has happened.  

I read a womans blog once her life was destroyed by surrogacy because her husband ended up leaving her for their surrogate. Grant it they kindly allowed her to keep the baby however she finale gave the baby to them because she could not deal with it, the poor baby was just a constant reminder of all she had lost.

Also surrogacy laws vary from state to state, in some states even if the surrogate is not biological related to the baby in the eyes of the court she is seen as the baby’s legal mother and in some cases she can have rights to that baby if she wants too regardless if its not biological her child.  Then you have surrogate where the baby is biological hers, and she can decide to keep the baby. Like what happen to that poor couple in Florida.

Answer 4

Obviously nothing has changed in this forum since my break. Cagney put it much more tactfully than I shall and makes a very appropriate analogy -  how you feel it is okay to rent another's womb and yet you are against adoption. You don't seem to see your hypocrisy. Your question is an invasion of privacy and extremely offensive. I not only take issue with your rude question but your casually cruel and tasteless remark about starving children. There are many of us who have and shall continue to adopt children for the very reason that they are starving and homeless. These children exist worldwide and are a very real fact of life, whether you choose to acknowledge them or not.

My fertility was never an issue (and certainly none of your business). Adoption was my choice.

Answer 5

I cannot add anything here except that I love the insight about womb rental is now ok?  Ok, so now this solves the DNA issue in a nice little package, but what about your argument about if a mother dies will the baby miss her?

So hmmmm, let's see, now we have a child of our DNA that is going to grow up womb-sick and what on earth would we call the surrogate, the rent a womb mom?  Y!A will need a whole new area in 20 years to deal with all the bitter angry children of surrogates that your line of thinking will cause.  Think of all the money to be made in self-help books and therapy.

For those people that truly cannot see themselves loving a child not of their DNA, then I suppose this is the next best option for them to have a family.  For those of us that can be health emotionally normal adults, we adopt.

Answer 6

Sometimes, it is easier to find a child to adopt, who needs a home and needs parents, as the result of an unwanted or unplanned pregnancy, than to find a woman who is willing to purposely become pregnant, carry a child, and give birth to a child.  There are also many legal issues that laws haven't caught up with the medical technology out there, and to have a woman pregnant with your child, then change her mind, can only destroy lives, and cost many amounts of money, that many people couldn't afford to pay, and then raise a child on top of those amounts.

Answer 7

Its not always that easy.  What if the PAP's eggs are no good?  They a surrogate would not help.  Plus have you looked into the costs of a surrogate.  It can cost up to $100K.  That is a lot of money that could be spent on adopting and then putting the other $80K away for college.

Answer 8

Well, I used to believe that there ARE alot of children out there that really need homes, but you guys have succeeded in making me doubt that.. congratulations!! Hope "We" are not wrong!!

In my case, there'd be no point in surrogate mother.. Nothing wrong with my womb, I just don't produce eggs.. so I would do the donor egg Invitro thing, not the surrogate mother thing..I consider it as an option, but  there's no difference, from adoption, biologically, accept the child could potentially have my husband's DNA, and we'd have the whole "pregnancy thing"..  I'm considering it as an option, I suppose, but I still get these fears that there are kids out there that need homes...

Hmm... if I DO do the invitro thing, I wonder if the child is still "guaranteed" to have trauma of separation or loss, even if I'm the one who carries it for 9 months.. I wonder if it will still suffer "adoption loss" because it does not have my DNA.. (Seeming as I have all kinds of problems with my endocrine system, that SHOULD be a good thing for the poor kid!! Maybe they won't have to go through the pain of infertility and feeling like you'll never be "normal," like you'll always be pre-pubescent and a "freak," even with medicine, they can get a "mostly normal" body.. heh.. Yeah, my DNA would be something a kid would really want, that's for sure!!)

Answer 9

My husband and I probably could have conceived, however, due to a health issue, I was told that I would have a very difficult pregnancy, and at the time, I was on a medication that could have caused problems to our baby- so we decided to adopt. I am adopted as well, and since I had a great family, I wanted to share that love with other children.  Without saying a surrogate is necessarily wrong, what is wrong with choosing adoption?  Lately , it seems to me that all the options that are available , it gets the lowest vote, and I am including abortion is these options. Why do you think that is?

Answer 10

I'll be honest and blunt, since i cannot think of any other way of putting it.  My husband does not want any of me or any of him inside anyone else.  He believes that is breaking our wedding vows.  When he puts it like that i have to agree with him.

Truly not meaning to be brief and rude, just a little embarrassed.

Answer 11

so it's ok to borrow someone else's womb, but not their child?

we didn't find continuing on our genetic line to be that important.

how is asking another woman to bond and grow my genetic child and then walk away and hand that child over to me not similiar to adoption, only it's your genetics.  should i keep her in that child's life?  would she not be my child's "birthmother"?

if you're not infertile and have not walked that road you cannot assume and think that those choices are easy.  it's the same way i do not assume or try to ask questions that would seem offensive to adoptees.  i have not walked their road, and unless you're infertile you have not walked mine.

to me this question seems as crazy as someone asking you aren't you glad you weren't aborted.  i'm not trying to be mean, i find that question absurd.  i'm just trying to put it where maybe it can be understood.  surrogacy and adoption are as seperate as adoption and abortion.  and you have touched a nerve here with me, much like you get when someone asks you the aborted and be grateful crud.  

adoption is not an alternative to infertility.  it doesn't cure it.  i'm still infertile and would be even if i'd used a surrogate.  nothing is going to change that.  what i wanted was to be a parent and make a positive influence in a child's life.  

as long as it's ethical, everyone involved believes in their choices (and understands the lifelong commitment involved to making those choices) and the choice is legal, it's no one's business how i choose to build my family.

ETA:  also i'm not trying to sound as if i feel you're attacking me or other infertile adoptive parents.  i'm sure it's just a question you were wondering about and i don't want my response to come off heated, although i'm sure it does.  it's not meant to be.  i spent years dealing with fertility issues and all the emotions and grief involved in it.  and yes i've dealt with them and did before i even talked to anyone about adoption.  but it's still a cranky little nerve that rears it's ugly little head every so often.  lol.  forgive me.  :)

Answer 12

Infertile is infertile whether you use another woman's womb or not. It's also much more expensive than adoption.

Answer 13

Lots of reasons, starting with, I don't produce eggs.  

The entanglements, legal and otherwise in a surrogate pregnancy were not something I wanted to deal with.  We were adopting shortly after the "baby M" debacle.

As much as I love my birthfamily, their genetics were not something that should be passed on.  My nieces and nephew have a host of medical problems, both physical and emotional.

We had planned an overseas adoption when our son was dropped in our laps.  We now have a wonderful fully open relationship with his mother.

Answer 14

Well, first of all, approximately half of infertility issues have to do with the man, so a surrogate mother won't fix that.  

Some people have ethical issues in regard to surrogates.  Some people are not comfortable with the idea of a child being the biological offspring of one parent, but not the other.

There are plenty of reasons for it, aside from simply wanting to adopt.