Is Surrogacy Ethically Permissible?
“I grew to love her; she was my child!” cried Mary Beth Whitehead in a desperate attempt to keep her child. This emotional battle between the surrogate mother and the client cast a disturbing light on the ethical and legal concerns regarding surrogacy. Is surrogacy ethically permissible? Mass media coverage associated with Baby M’s case normalized the use of surrogacy in the U.S. (Markens 174). However, different methods of surrogacy bring about different consequences. Types of surrogacy include genetic, total, full, commercial and altruistic surrogacy. Full and altruistic surrogacy promotes a positive relationship between the parents, surrogate, and society while international surrogacy, in the form of commercial surrogacy, can cause a negative
…show more content…
Surrogates hope to provide a family to others. Being that, surrogate Diksha expects appreciation for bringing happiness to the client’s family. However, after Diksha’s delivery of the baby, the clients never contacted Diksha and cut off ties between her and the baby, perhaps fearing the surrogate’s attempt to reclaim the child. The clients’ reaction after Dikasha’s delivery damaged her pride. International surrogacy, in this case, is non-beneficent because it takes away from the surrogate’s wish to help another family. Additionally, it is maleficent because it harms the surrogate’s dignity. Surrogate Tajal was anguished because her client family did not even come to see her after her delivery (Pande 183-186). Their reaction made Tajal feel unappreciated. Both surrogates wanted to feel respected for their actions. Yet, to the clients, the surrogate was a business partner that they paid to deliver their baby. Therefore, the clients do not feel appreciative for the surrogates, deviating from the surrogate’s expectations. Thus, commercial surrogacy damages a surrogate’s dignity and takes away her desires to help others, making surrogacy non-beneficent and
Surrogates hope to provide a family to others. Being that, surrogate Diksha expects appreciation for bringing happiness to the client’s family. However, after Diksha’s delivery of the baby, the clients never contacted Diksha and cut off ties between her and the baby, perhaps fearing the surrogate’s attempt to reclaim the child. The clients’ reaction after Dikasha’s delivery damaged her pride. International surrogacy, in this case, is non-beneficent because it takes away from the surrogate’s wish to help another family. Additionally, it is maleficent because it harms the surrogate’s dignity. Surrogate Tajal was anguished because her client family did not even come to see her after her delivery (Pande 183-186). Their reaction made Tajal feel unappreciated. Both surrogates wanted to feel respected for their actions. Yet, to the clients, the surrogate was a business partner that they paid to deliver their baby. Therefore, the clients do not feel appreciative for the surrogates, deviating from the surrogate’s expectations. Thus, commercial surrogacy damages a surrogate’s dignity and takes away her desires to help others, making surrogacy non-beneficent and