• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should it be legal to pay surrogates to have babies for you and your significant other?

Should paid surrogacy be legal?


  • Total voters
    25
And you cannot pay a surrogate.

So what say you? Should it be legal to pay your surrogate?

I think it's more complicated than that. It's that you can't pay your surrogate for "ownership"

Is Surrogacy Legal in New York? | Scott Legal, P.C.

The current legality in New York is driven by court case where a surrogate (who was also the biological mother) refused to give up the child. As a result, NY law provides that surrogate contracts are not recognized, and are in fact illegal to enter into. This does not preclude people serving as surrogates for family or friends. Also, lately, most surrogate birth mothers are not the biological mother.

I think New York should and will change the law. Private arrangements have always occurred.
 
Do not confuse the biological mother with a the birth mother.

If I understand it correct, true surrogacy is someone's fertilized egg implanted into the incubating womb.
 
Because it's exploitative. She's not freely consenting to it. She only chooses it out of necessity.

And besides, even if she freely consents, what of the right of the child to know his mother?

That would be as ridiculous as saying I am not freely consenting to do my job as I am only doing it out of necessity.

The child would know his/her mother. The person carrying the child wouldn't be it's mother. If we reached the point that women no longer carried children but babies were grown in an artificial womb, would you consider the artificial womb the child's parent?
 
I think it's more complicated than that. It's that you can't pay your surrogate for "ownership"

Is Surrogacy Legal in New York? | Scott Legal, P.C.

The current legality in New York is driven by court case where a surrogate (who was also the biological mother) refused to give up the child. As a result, NY law provides that surrogate contracts are not recognized, and are in fact illegal to enter into. This does not preclude people serving as surrogates for family or friends. Also, lately, most surrogate birth mothers are not the biological mother.

I think New York should and will change the law. Private arrangements have always occurred.

Seems like the law is conflating 2 seperate issues. I don't think the biological mother should be forced to give up her child should she change her mind. In the case of an actual surrogate where it is not her biological child then I would say the parental rights should go to the actual parents.
 
I don't know all of the details on this, but I believe some states allow it. New York state government has proposed a bill to make it legal in their state. What say you? Should paid surrogacy be legal or illegal?

I voted the first choice but what is the definition of a criminal? I would have left that phrase off.
 
I have no problem with it's legality.

IMO people should have control over their own bodies. So as far as I am concerned, prostitution, bondage, personal drug use, a person's choice to alter their appearance via plastic surgery, a woman's right to choose, a person's desire for assisted suicide...and paid surrogacy is all one in the same to me.

As long as it is a free choice made by an ADULT with the full understanding of the consequences, and acceptance of full responsibility for outcomes good or bad...I say why not? :shrug:

P.S. I could not vote because I don't understand the "Barring criminals" exception in choice #1.

Sums is up properly. Not sure why anyone would believe differently.
 
That's not "free choice." That's a devil's bargain made under duress. It has nothing to do with my original response. :doh

Psst, the decisions of the poor, especially those in debt, are basically all under duress.
 
Why would no amount be enough? Women choose to be surrogates out of compassion for the couple who can't conceive their own. Why do you think she'd only go for it if the payment was $1 million? Most surrogates get much, much less than that.

The ones who do it or money don't do it out of compassion. With money not involved they're no longer selling their bodies.
 
That would be as ridiculous as saying I am not freely consenting to do my job as I am only doing it out of necessity.

In a sense that's true, which is why we have labor laws to prevent exploitation in the labor market.

The child would know his/her mother. The person carrying the child wouldn't be it's mother. If we reached the point that women no longer carried children but babies were grown in an artificial womb, would you consider the artificial womb the child's parent?

An artificial womb isn't a person. A surrogate mother carries the baby in her for 9 months, feels the kicks, feeds the baby indirectly, goes to sleep with the baby, etc. There's a lot more involved here than you seem to realize.
 
Why would no amount be enough? Women choose to be surrogates out of compassion for the couple who can't conceive their own. Why do you think she'd only go for it if the payment was $1 million? Most surrogates get much, much less than that.

Which shows you how easily exploited surrogates can be. There is a reason why this is illegal to pay for it in most developed nations.
 
In a sense that's true, which is why we have labor laws to prevent exploitation in the labor market.



An artificial womb isn't a person. A surrogate mother carries the baby in her for 9 months, feels the kicks, feeds the baby indirectly, goes to sleep with the baby, etc. There's a lot more involved here than you seem to realize.

The fact that an artificial womb isn't a person is precisely my point. The surrogate is not the mother and ultimately is a living incubator for the child of another couple. I realize what is involved, I just don't see how that is relevant.
 
The fact that an artificial womb isn't a person is precisely my point. The surrogate is not the mother and ultimately is a living incubator for the child of another couple. I realize what is involved, I just don't see how that is relevant.

And there is always a connection between that child and what you call a living incubator.
 
I don't know all of the details on this, but I believe some states allow it. New York state government has proposed a bill to make it legal in their state. What say you? Should paid surrogacy be legal or illegal?

Good question. I'll have to get back to you on this one.
 
Which shows you how easily exploited surrogates can be. There is a reason why this is illegal to pay for it in most developed nations.

It's legal in most states in this very developed nation.
 
I voted the first choice but what is the definition of a criminal? I would have left that phrase off.

I was going to, but I knew someone would say "Sure it's fine, but what if the surrogate or parents are druggies or have a history of violence?"
 
It's legal in most states in this very developed nation.

This very developed nation also tolerates many other evils, like exploitation of foreign workers, exploitation of migrant workers, and usury. This isn't a good argument.
 
It's legal in most states in this very developed nation.

And that doesn't mean its right. For a couple that cannot have a child themselves, they can either:

1. Find a surrogate that will be willing to have a child for them in exchange for the costs of doing so - like missed work, medical costs and so on. Typically this would be a friend or family member.

Or.

2. Adopt. As someone that has a biological son and two adopted daughters, your kid is your kid regardless of whether they share any of your genetics or not. There are around 150 million orphans in this world that need families.

You pay women for surrogacy, and its going to be exploited. How many upper middle class women get paid to be surrogates? I doubt its very many.
 
And that doesn't mean its right. For a couple that cannot have a child themselves, they can either:

1. Find a surrogate that will be willing to have a child for them in exchange for the costs of doing so - like missed work, medical costs and so on. Typically this would be a friend or family member.

Or.

2. Adopt. As someone that has a biological son and two adopted daughters, your kid is your kid regardless of whether they share any of your genetics or not. There are around 150 million orphans in this world that need families.

You pay women for surrogacy, and its going to be exploited. How many upper middle class women get paid to be surrogates? I doubt its very many.

Why does it matter if the woman WANTS to do it for the money? Why can't she use her body as she wants to use her body?
 
Why does it matter if the woman WANTS to do it for the money? Why can't she use her body as she wants to use her body?

Because poor, destitute women shouldn't be forced into selling their bodies (like with surrogacy and prostitution) just to survive. It's the same reason why they shouldn't be able to sell their labor below a certain amount. Poor people are exploitable, and if we legislate that people can contract to whatever they wish, then you are guaranteeing exploitation.
 
Why does it matter if the woman WANTS to do it for the money? Why can't she use her body as she wants to use her body?

Starting to wonder if the motivation is simply hatred of babies.

Funny that many of the same people that will justify abortion by saying a woman has a right to bodily autonomy when it deals with killing the child in the womb will flip immediately when it comes to prostitution, drugs, or in this case putting a baby inside her. Seems like the only case in which some people advocate for bodily autonomy is when the end result is the death of an unborn child.
 
I don't know all of the details on this, but I believe some states allow it. New York state government has proposed a bill to make it legal in their state. What say you? Should paid surrogacy be legal or illegal?

I think it's between the parties involved and the government should keep its nose out of their business.
 
Because poor, destitute women shouldn't be forced into selling their bodies (like with surrogacy and prostitution) just to survive. It's the same reason why they shouldn't be able to sell their labor below a certain amount. Poor people are exploitable, and if we legislate that people can contract to whatever they wish, then you are guaranteeing exploitation.

Lol, In other words people are too stupid to make decisions for themselves so you must make the choice for them.

Just because you make a law doesn't make the practice go away, it simply pushes it underground making it even worse for those you believe you are protecting. Take prostitution for instance, there is no way to prevent it from taking place and any woman that is not averse to using her body to make money is now in a position that she is completely without legal recourse against some of the worst scum on the planet.
 
Back
Top Bottom