|
|
Post by Anne on May 24, 2009 6:54:38 GMT -5
Pioneering my ass. 60 minutes has just showed a story about surrogates in India carrying babies for money, but they were making out like this was the greatest innovation of the last few centuries. I don't know about you, but it seems pretty damn sick to me. If women choose to be a surrogate, fine, but considering how poor and taken advantage of so many in India are, I somehow feel dubious these reported poverty-stricken women are selling the use of their womb from the kindness of their hearts.
Why are they making out like it's totally blaze and normal, like ordering a customised doll off of the net? That's all the reporter did, she might as well have been talking about the latest iPhone. 'You can do it all from the comfort of your own home'.
>.> Meanwhile some poor woman has to carry the child for 9 moths, go through all the hormonal, emotional and physical affects both during and post pregnancy, then agree to never see it again, and not even be happy with the parents it goes to. And for what, 5k? Horrible!
|
|
Uber Loodle
Mural
Llama Whisperer Llama Whisperer
I put the FUN in dysfunctional.
Posts: 827
|
Post by Uber Loodle on May 24, 2009 9:17:39 GMT -5
That is kind of sick...
|
|
|
|
Post by Ice on May 24, 2009 9:39:28 GMT -5
Definitely not the best idea ever.  I guess it's good in the sense that they get cash - 5K (USD, at least) goes a long way in India, trust me. Their attitude is a little questionable, though. |
|
|
|
Post by Sofia on May 24, 2009 9:53:54 GMT -5
I agree with Ice, at least they're getting much needed money. And making it illegal or making it harder to become a surrogate isn't going to help - it'll make their income disappear, and that's just as much of a problem. It shouldn't be advertised like that, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Anne on May 24, 2009 11:41:06 GMT -5
I didn't say it should become illegal, merely that they approached the subject very poorly. Money is good of course, I'm happy they're reasonably well paid (although I can't help but wonder where the rest of the 40k the couple paid for their twins went) but the fact is the whole thing takes advantage of destitute women who may be choosing between that and them or their current children starving, and it shouldn't be treated as if it is a great new product for westerners to take advantage of.
They even called it a Baby Factory with good humour, yet mention of a Puppy Factory would send them up in arms. That's what I found disgusting. The woman they showed looked so sad, too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sofia on May 24, 2009 21:36:10 GMT -5
They even called it a Baby Factory with good humour, yet mention of a Puppy Factory would send them up in arms. That's what I found disgusting. The woman they showed looked so sad, too. That is disgusting. I can not even put into words how disgusting that is. I mean, I understand hiring a surrogate if you yourself can't have babies, but to ADVERTISE it on TV. >.> |
|
|
|
Post by Anne on May 24, 2009 22:29:14 GMT -5
Yup, it's unspeakably wrong. x.x; Even saying, yes this is a surrogate and a good option if you're desperate but be aware this may be the circumstances she's getting into this for, and this is what she will go through, would have been better then what they did.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ice on May 25, 2009 9:59:12 GMT -5
A baby factory? Seriously? I guess that does describe the nature of the "industry"...
The rest of the 40K probably went to the middleman who came up with the scheme and is making him/herself rich under the guise of charging for transportation, accommodation, legal, etc. fees. You get a lot of those.
|
|
I guess it's good in the sense that they get cash - 5K (USD, at least) goes a long way in India, trust me. Their attitude is a little questionable, though.