Surrogacy and IVF Debate Thread

[Lidl Drip]

How do you feel about people who can not have kids naturally doing in vitro fertilization or surrogacy to have/buy a child? Do you think it should be banned, regulated, allowed? Should it be banned or allowed only for gays or only for straights? Should single people be able to have fatherless/motherless babies? Should there be an age limit?

There is no age limit and no background checks at all for surrogacy. Technically an 80 year old man who has just gotten out of jail for raping 20 kids can but a baby, as long as he can pay. They recently uncovered a huge illegal surrogacy operation in China that is rumored to have discarded any children that were born disabled.


My opinion:
Surrogacy is child trafficking and it needs to be banned ASAP. We really have reached a point of medical dystopia where doctors are playing god instead of saving peoples life. This sounds harsh but if you can't have children naturally that sucks but you don't get to use another woman's womb and egg to create a child that wasn't meant to exist and will never know it's mother. It's unbelievably cruel and evil. I feel similarly about IVF although I think some fertility treatments are okay. The consequences of people actively going against natural selection are going to be a disaster for humanity. Nick Fuentes is an IVF baby for example.

 

[Android raptor]

Surrogacy has issues but I'm less worried about it than I am forced pregnancy.

 

[Yeeted Teet]

It should not be legal to purchase a human life.

Surrogacy needs to be flat out illegal with heavy penalties, especially international surrogacy that preys on impoverished women in third world countries. It's like prostitution- there's a good reason you can't get enough local women signing up to meet demand so it has to be outsourced to poorer women with less education and fewer options.

With regards to IVF, that's a bit of a stickier subject but the fact is that if a person or couple is infertile, there are probably evolutionary reasons for that. Humans trying to force their will upon nature rarely ends well.

 

[Heckler1]

Should single people be able to have fatherless/motherless babies?

No. The amount of people who can't naturally have a child an just adopt.

 

[CoolFool]

I used to think surrogacy was a neat thing that could help certain people have a baby that couldn't otherwise conceive, but over the years I've changed my mind and want it banned. The only people I see using it are mostly rich women that don't want to ruin their bodies or gay guys, they basically just see having a baby as the same thing as buying a new car. Besides, the industry targets broke and desperate women. Like you never see any rich or secure women offering their bodies for this, do you? I actually was considering this when I was a broke AF university student because hey, $50,000 sounds nice when you're desperate.

IVF I don't think should be banned but tbh I think a lot of times it is not needed and is a money grab. For example, I know someone who had blocked tubes and was told IVF was the only option she had if she wanted to get pregnant. Thankfully, she did more researched and learned a lot of women can unblock their tubes by losing weight, changing their diet, and taking supplements that eat scar tissue. She followed that advice and was able to get pregnant.

 

[Road Work Ahead]

I'm not sure I even want gay men adopting babies, let alone renting out poor women to make one for them.

As for IVF, I don't like the false hope it gives people. Couples will spend years and hundreds of thousands of dollars trying various fertility treatments only to end up in failure. I wish the foster system wasn't as fucked up as it is so those couples could maybe use those resources on helping other children.

 

[Layton Mysteries]

I agree on surrogacy. It is completely wrong towards the (biological) mother and the child. I don't think its morally acceptable to allow prostitution because it is selling usage of ones body for money, and I think surrogacy is the same. As long as it is financially compensated, there will be women who go into surrogacy out of hardship. Not to mention the impact on the child.
I don't know a whole lot about IVF, but I do think there is some correlation between people who were created through IVF and developmental issues. I really think it should be studied a bit to see if there are negative effects from it. However, as long as the egg is from the woman who will carry then raise the baby, the sperm is from a man she is in a relationship with, and both will be parents in the child's life, I don't think it is nearly as bad as surrogacy. When you start implanting eggs from one woman into another though I think that it is immoral because it could impact the child, there just isn't enough information about it, and a child shouldn't be a medical experiment to see if it is harmful or not.

 

[Safir]

How do you feel about people who can not have kids naturally doing in vitro fertilization or surrogacy to have/buy a child? Do you think it should be banned, regulated, allowed?

IVF: go for it but no frivolous generic testing (it can hurt the baby, embryos should only be tested for body horror when there's an increased risk of body horror). Oh and pay for it out of pocket.
IVF should only be used when AI (advanced turkey baster) can't help.

Surrogacy: evil, everyone who engages in it should be executed.

Should it be banned or allowed only for gays or only for straights?

It should be allowed for everyone but a baby must have one parent of each sex. It's not the fertility doctor's business if the parents are "gay" or "straight", it's the CPS's, but there should be no such thing as two women or two men having a baby. It's always a man and a woman.

Should there be an age limit?

No.

Should single people be able to have fatherless/motherless babies?

Fatherless: yes, there are already plenty of fatherless babies.
Babies can't be motherless yet. Every baby has a mother, it's the woman who gave birth.

I think motherless babies would be bad for civilization, generally speaking it's good that most men who can't convince women to have children can't have children.

One thing you didn't touch on is egg donation. I don't have a yes or no opinion on it, it fucks up the donor and is highly exploitable BUT if it's allowed, the woman who gave birth is the mother.

 

[Gog & Magog]

I once read a story of a sperm bank that didn't background check a guy and 12 different surrogate mothers ended up with his sperm. All their children were diagnosed with autism.

 

[KittyGremlin]

Surrogacy has issues but I'm less worried about it than I am forced pregnancy.

Another day another banger. Thanks AR for your unique perspective.

 

[Lidl Drip]

One thing you didn't touch on is egg donation. I don't have a yes or no opinion on it, it fucks up the donor and is highly exploitable BUT if it's allowed, the woman who gave birth is the mother.

Young women with college debt are heavily advertised to currently to become egg donors. With a couple of donations you can basically be debt free and they pay you more if you have a college degree. It's financial coercion and they are targeting a group they know are in bad financial positions. It's also extremely dangerous and a much more invasive procedure than sperm donation and several woman literally died during the retrieval procedure. I doubt they really educate women about the dangers properly.

 

[User names must be unique]

I thought they screen for genetic health when doing IVF as pretty much the first step, if that is true it's fine provided the couple doing it are married and willing to foot the bill. The weird IVF shit they do when they fail the genetic tests and have genesplicing to fix the parents wonky DNA by introducing a 3rd set of genes is fucked and should be banned as should trait selection.

Surrogacy should be banned.

 

[Android raptor]

Surrogates are at least theoretically compensated and consenting. Of course there's a financial coercion aspect, but it's not like girls and women in red states who get nothing except health problems and medical bills for being forced to gestate unwanted pregnancies b/c muh domestic supply of adoptable infants.

It should not be legal to purchase a human life.

Wait til you hear about adoption, especially international adoption. With enough money you can even straight up steal kids that already have parents/family. Madonna did it.

Surrogacy isn't perfect but the issues it has aren't as unique to it as people think, plus a lot of it is just RW retardation focused exclusively on rich gay couple using surrogates while ignoring shit like thar Russian crazy baby lady married to a middle aged Turkish Mob boss who had 10 kids via surrogates (that are cared for by nannies b/c of course they are). Especially when they openly support forcing girls and women to gestate unwanted pregnancies, you don't actually give a fuck about women if you support forced pregnancy.

 

[Hassou Tobi]

https://fairerdisputations.org/liberal-feminism-cant-resist-eugenics/

"From a perspective that grants universal personhood, the problem is obvious: such technologies still do violence to human individuals. If human life begins at conception, conceiving new people only to harvest their genetic material and kill them before propagating a new generation is self-evidently monstrous. But from a progressive vantage-point, the question of universal personhood is already not just conceded but vociferously denied, in the name of women’s right to autonomy at any price. On what basis, then, may we object to in-vitro embryonic creation, experimentation, editing, re-creation, and euthanization? Why should billions of embryos not die, in pursuit of human enhancement? Countless embryos already do, after all, in the multi-billion-dollar IVF industry."

Surrogates are at least theoretically compensated and consenting. Of course there's a financial coercion aspect, but it's not like girls and women in red states who get nothing except health problems and medical bills for being forced to gestate unwanted pregnancies b/c muh domestic supply of adoptable infants.

the babies don't consent to being ripped away from their mothers.

 

[SilentDuck]

For all of IVF's successes it is also a scam industry that creates a notion that it's fine for potential mother's to remain medically unhealthy, overweight or overaged as they are bilked out of 10k here, 20k there. Very perverse incentives. Very common for fatties to fake or actually casuse themselves to have "PCOS" because "it's a disease" rather than just being nature cancelling you out of reproduction until you put the fork down. If nature says you are unfit, make yourself fit if it's so bloody important to you. If you can't even be bothered to do that then there's 90% chance you have no business raising a child.

Breeding pens are the only ethical choice that can also satisfies scripture. Formal surrogacy is also gross. Insallah.

 

[Lemmingwiser]

I once read a story of a sperm bank that didn't background check a guy and 12 different surrogate mothers ended up with his sperm. All their children were diagnosed with autism.

It was a dutch sperm bank and it was much much worse than that. You may be thinking of an early report. The real situation is so much worse.

Jan Karbaat ended up selling this autistic surinam man's sperm to other fertility clinics across europe. This autistic surinam man has been identified to have fathered 40 children at this point.

He also falsely advertised sperm and led the only dutch clinic that would offer sperm to single women. He often lied about their background, giving hallmark perfect description of college educated wealthy men that championed women's rights. There was a long court case going as hundreds of women noticed their child looked like him, but he died before the proceedings finished and his family denied access to DNA testing to confirm. But there were even notes of his own words where he described how he would mix his own and other sperm and "let the best sperm win".

At this point there are about 68 children to legally have been established to be his. So probably more. 39 have made damage claims, but most are more than 20 years after the incident so no legal culpability.

Perhaps least of these, but he also charged women for frozen eggs for years after he had already gotten rid of them.

When they went deeper into discovery and asking questions, someone also said that he would sometimes use syringes with water instead of sperm. My presumption is to ensure more visits.

As a result of this charity 'donorkind" (donor child) did an investigation and found two more gynocolists that used their own sperm to father double digit kids.

 

[FarmVille]

I once read a story of a sperm bank that didn't background check a guy and 12 different surrogate mothers ended up with his sperm. All their children were diagnosed with autism.

They don’t even check for things like family history of schizophrenia at sperm banks. There are virtually no regulations.

 

[DumbDude43]

in my opinion surrogacy is ok within the family.
like, if a woman is infertile, her sister or cousin could act as a surrogate for her to still have a child. that's wholesome and nice.
but between strangers it is very sketchy, and as soon as money is involved it becomes extremely sketchy and should not be allowed.

don't have particularly strong opinions about IVF, except that it sometimes lulls women into a false sense of security and tricks them into throwing away their future on a false promise.
>you dont need to start a family now, we will just freeze a couple of your eggs so you can have children later!
>20 years go by
>turns out 9 of the 12 eggs fail to fertilize, 2 more fail at early embryo stage, and the final one ends in a miscarriage after 4 months
>whoops looks like you're doomed to die childless and alone now hehe sucks to be you, no refunds :^)
this is very bad, but i'm not sure if outlawing the entire thing is the best solution

 

[Whatevermancer]

there are probably evolutionary reasons for that. Humans trying to force their will upon nature rarely ends well.

Why stop at IVF? Let's also ban cancer treatments, getting cancer is just God telling you that your time is up.

 

[Teghern]

Surrogacy is literal baby trading there's no way around this and I'm glad no one is really unrestrictedly defending it, as infertility troubles continue to be more prominent I think we'll see some real culture-struggles in the near future because so long as it is just rich cunts doing it in leafy suburbs most normalfags can happily ignore it but that could be very different if we have westron cultured womb havers being effectively predated on when the third worlder supply inevitably dries up or demand shoots up. I predict this shit will be locked down in the coming decades, perhaps after a few good actual literal legal trafficking scandals (already nearly happened with a few of those gay couples right?).

IVF is icky, not on the same tier as actual child trafficking but something that is bad overall IMO. Sad truth is that not very lineage can or should endure for various reasons and scientifically getting around this is I think a moral mistake that will lead to more severe errors further down the road you go. If you can inseminate an egg with microscopic turkey baster it isn't that big a leap to messing with the chromones in with said mini needle etc. Fact is the slippery slope is very much real as we all know.