Reply

Cast Your Vote:

    • Yes, they have the right to keep the child -- Votes: 9
    • No, they do not have the right to keep the child -- Votes: 116
    • Other - Explain -- Votes: 3
Surrogate Mother Keeping Child Miss Molly! Due August 11 (boy); 3 kids; Ormond Beach, Florida 3276 posts
20th Nov '11

My question is: Do you think a surrogate mother has the right to keep the child she carry's to term?



This is in the situation that she is carrying the child that is the egg of a woman and the sperm of a man that are married, but the woman just could not carry to term. The egg for the child is NOT the surrogates egg, so the child is NOT biologically the surrogates, she is only carrying the child for the mother and father.

Kimber-lily Due September 27 (girl); 4 kids; Nova Scotia 28962 posts
20th Nov '11

No she can't because there are contracts signed before the doctor would turkey baste the surrogate.

Aliyah'sMommyBri :) 17 kids; Stafford, Virginia 3433 posts
20th Nov '11

nope. I believe they have to sign legal papers...

Squid Kid Unavailable, NA, United States 32448 posts
20th Nov '11

She's not a biological parent, she is only a guardian per se. Plus they sign forms to keep that from happening

Jessica- Mom of 4 52 kids; Topeka, Kansas 4000 posts
20th Nov '11

IMO they have no right to keep the baby at all. they shouldn't of volunteered if they couldnt do it

Monica♥YASDYARDFR 17 kids; Beverly Hills, California 57063 posts
20th Nov '11

No and for her to think that she can is wrong.

buhbyebabymoreimportant Pennsylvania 5530 posts
20th Nov '11

Not the biological parent, so no. Now if it was HER egg, then yea. Otherwise nope. She has no right to keep the baby. She should not have done it if she couldn't handle it. JMO.

Malakai's mommy 1 child; Appleton, Wisconsin 1570 posts
20th Nov '11

this is why i would never be a surrogate; i know i'd get too emotionally attatched to the baby

Raωkeℓ 1 child; Costa Rica 8257 posts
20th Nov '11
Quoting It's a girl im so blessed:" IMO they have no right to keep the baby at all. they shouldn't of volunteered if they couldnt do it"


This is what I believe.

B00Bzilla 1 child; Defiance, Ohio 782 posts
20th Nov '11

Not when it's biologically not her child.
She should know what being a surrogate means and although I can understand her wanting to be in the child's like as maybe a God-parent or something, she should know better. When she decided to be a surrogate she decided to do a great service for a deserving couple and she should be very very proud of herself. And although I'm sure it's hard to carry a child for 9 months and then give it away, it's a reality any surrogate has to except before she's impregnated.

Done with Drama 2 kids; California 8183 posts
20th Nov '11

No, she has no biological ties to the child. She had to sign some pretty serious legal paperwork BEFORE she was even pregnant. So, for her to try to keep a baby that is not hers can cause her to be charged with kidnapping and a whole mess of other fines and such.

P E N I S Due February 27; 34 kids; Washington 13746 posts
20th Nov '11

She has no rights to the child just because she carried it. Its not her biological child, she knowingly carried another's child. To think she could keep the baby is absurd.




Also, surrogates sign legal documents to prevent them from being able to keep the unborn child anyway.

☮LoveAndSerenity 1 child; Kenosha, Wisconsin 52409 posts
20th Nov '11
Quoting Kimberlea:" No she can't because there are contracts signed before the doctor would turkey baste the surrogate."


:!:



There are papers filed and signed before any of this is done. If she tries to run off and keep the child, it's kidnapping and a felony.



(Provided the state in which the surrogacy is taking place actually recognizes surrogate laws. Many do not.)

ρiηkie ρie 3 kids; 3 angel babies; Kentucky 21902 posts
20th Nov '11

I honestly don't know. What I DO know is I could never be a surrogate. Why? Because if I carry a child in my womb 9 months, feel him/her kick and move. Watch my belly grow. Go through all the misery, all the pain. And then give birth to that child? I don't care if that child is biologically related to me or not. In my head, that's my baby. MY body nourished and grew that baby. That baby is a part of me. I couldn't do it. Donate eggs? Sure. But I couldn't give up a child like that. I have nothing against surrogacy or surrogate mothers, I think it's a beautiful thing they're doing. :) I just couldn't do it myself. Now do I think it's right if she decides to keep the baby... not really. Because I'm sure the parents have paid legal fees and doctor fees, etc. BUUUTTT I can understand why it might happen. But correct me if I'm wrong, isn't there laws about surrogacy that keeps that from happening though?

*Mrs. Varicose Veins* 5 kids; Chunky, Mississippi 22987 posts
20th Nov '11
Quoting ♥Kinky Dinks♥:" I honestly don't know. What I DO know is I could never be a surrogate. Why? Because if I carry a child ... [snip!] ... why it might happen. But correct me if I'm wrong, isn't there laws about surrogacy that keeps that from happening though? "


I always thought this too. I would love to be a surrogate. I talked to a girl on FB once about it and she claimed she was not attached to the baby but I don't know if it would happen like that for me.