I have never questioned same sex parenting. Go back and read the thread again

Ok…

Then there is the bond that only mother and child have that is being taken away from that child.

sounds very much like your opinion is, every time two guys choose to parent together, they are “taking away” something that you believe is important to a child.

sounds very much like your opinion is, every time two guys choose to parent together, they are “taking away” something that you believe is important to a child.

No. What I am saying is if (and we don’t know the details) so it is an if, this is a “baby to order” then yes. But that goes for any couple regardless of their sexual orientation.

So I think that about covers it:

– TD and his partner will both be dads, and that’s fine;

– only one one (or possibly neither) of them will be the biological father, and that’s fine;

– somewhere there will be a biological mother and, in all probability, biological family members. How fine this is will depend on individuals involved and how relationships are managed. The role of money and power in these sorts of relationships I would consider worthy of debate. But probably not here.

Which leaves the huge issue of the lack of apostrophe and the unnecessary capital in the thread title. That really is deliberately provocative.

so how can you be ok with same sex parenting but not surrogacy? What are the terms that make it acceptable to you?

Adoption.

Ok, So you think that gay couple should have to adopt a child before they can have one of their own via surrogacy. Does this apply equally to lesbian couples or does the fact that they have their own wombs mean it’s fine, or do you view surrogate sperm as equally unacceptable?

Does the same apply to hetrosexual couples, after all they are selfishly bringing a child into the world without considering adoption as a first option.

somewhere there will be a biological mother and, in all probability, biological family members. How fine this is will depend on individuals involved and how relationships are managed. The role of money and power these sorts of relationships I would consider worthy of debate. But probably not here.

I know a couple of pairs of adoptive parents – which I imagine is a similar mechanism to the same-sex parenting that Tom Daley and his husband are entering into.  They both have to maintain a level of contact with the birth mother, including at least cards, letters and gifts.    I’m not sure if physical contact is also mandated.  If it is the loss of the maternal relationship becomes less.

No. What I am saying is if (and we don’t know the details) so it is an if, this is a “baby to order” then yes. But that goes for any couple regardless of their sexual orientation.

So how about donor sperm and eggs?

To be honest, there really isn’t an issue here. It’s incredibly hard to adopt new born children, as there are far more willing parents than newborns up for adoption.

There are many children at older ages that may be requiring care and eventually adoption, but really these children would require an unusual level of support and care and I would think very hard before taking somebody like that on!

There are potential issues with surrogacy of course, but I can’t see them being any more significant than those involved with any other way of bringing a child into the world!

I also have questions over that. Do we all have a universal right to become parents? Are we turning babies into commodities?

Oh and while I’m here, whether he’s a dad or not is really not up to me.

My little brother (adopted) has been in touch with his biological mother and half siblings, but in his words “You lot are my family, they’re my biological family.”.

Ok, So you think that gay couple should have to adopt a child before they can have one of their own via surrogacy.

Where did I say that?

Maybe next time think a bit before your attempts at humour then, how about that, trailwagger?

I also have questions over that. Do we all have a universal right to become parents? Are we turning babies into commodities?

1) Yes, luckily we do not live in a totalitarian regime (yet).

2) Nope.

Maybe next time think a bit before your attempts at humour then, how about that, trailwagger?

point taken.

Ok, So you think that gay couple should have to adopt a child before they can have one of their own via surrogacy.

Does this apply equally to lesbian couples or does the fact that they have their own wombs mean it’s fine, or do you view surrogate sperm as equally unacceptable?

Does the same apply to hetrosexual couples, after all they are selfishly bringing a child into the world without considering adoption as a first option.

I think that is something we should be considering as a society. There are many unwanted and unloved children out there who could really use some loving parents. Of course I understand the desire to have your own offspring (regardless of method), however the costs associated with enabling this in an artificial manner would be far better spent IMHO getting existing children matched up with potential new parents. And yes, that includes heterosexual couples who cannot conceive naturally.

1) Yes, luckily we do not live in a totalitarian regime (yet).
2) Nope.

Care to elaborate?

Where did I say that?

I’m not going to re quote you fully as it’s too much of a PITA on this form at the moment. but

you state you don’t have a problem with gay parents

you state you have a problem with surrogacy.

I asked you what your preferred option to surrogacy is and you replied, adoption.

so you think that gay parents should adopt before having a child by surrogacy. on that basis can you answer my questions about whether this applies equally to lesbian or hetrosexual couples?

Then there is the bond that only mother and child have that is being taken away from that child.

My mother is an evil cow. I’d much rather have had my dad x 2

I think that is something we should be considering as a society.

@rene59, careful in some peoples eyes we no right to consider this as a society, and people should be left alone to do whatever they like.

so you think that gay parents should adopt before having a child by surrogacy. on that basis can you answer my questions about whether this applies equally to lesbian or hetrosexual couples?

I already have, but yes I do think it applies equally to lesbian and hetro couples.

Ok,  so the only option to agree with is the old fashioned way between a man and a woman. Should adoption come before that?

I read an article earlier last year which argued that infertile people having children should be a right and not a privilege and that this should be enabled by the NHS for all. That alone is controversial for me. The article then expanded on the definition of infertile for the purposes of treatment. This included not having a partner and also unable to gain a suitable partner. When we get to the stage in society that we can’t even discuss these things and opposing views are shouted down and accusations thrown about then I’ll be opting out altogether. Not that anyone would give a ****.

Ok, so the only option to agree with is the old fashioned way between a man and a woman. Should adoption come before that?

There will come a point (if we are not already there) that we need to manage the population of the earth, and also the problem of unwanted pregnancy and orphaned children. That is not the issue we are discussing.

Science and the advancement of technology has enabled us to become Gods, the creators of life (in an artificial way). So two of my previous questions still stand.

1. Just because we have the capability of creating life artificially, does that automatically mean we should, or is there an ethical or moral debate to be had on this subject?

2. Do we all have a universal right to be parents?

Ok, so the only option to agree with is the old fashioned way between a man and a woman. Should adoption come before that?

I think everyone should consider all the options and pros and cons before having children. You can’t legislate or enforce policy on that though as old fashioned way between a man and woman will always produce unplanned offspring so no. However when it comes to public money being spent on artificial methods then is that honestly the best use of that money?

Science and the advancement of technology has enabled us to become Gods, the creators of life (in an artificial way). So two of my previous questions still stand.

1. Just because we have the capability of creating life artificially, does that automatically mean we should, or is there an ethical or moral debate to be had on this subject?

2. Do we all have a universal right to be parents?

Seems to me you are backtracking from your original intention to debate the ‘ins and outs’ of same sex parenting. I fail to see how having a child via a surrogate mother is the same as becoming Gods and creating life in an artificial way. although as you state you don’t know much about biology so I can see how you might think that.   So what is your actual issue with surrogacy?

The original questions you posited revolved around wanting to know who the actual father and mother were, and the rights of the child to know their biological parentage.

I think everyone should consider all the options and pros and cons before having children. You can’t legislate or enforce policy on that though as old fashioned way between a man and woman will always produce unplanned offspring so no. However when it comes to public money being spent on artificial methods then is that honestly the best use of that money?

well, the right to have children whenever you choose to do so, and in whatever numbers you wish is a basic human right applied to both couples and individuals. I don’t believe there is a caveat that they must both be fertile first. You get into dangerous ground when you apply caveats to human rights IMHO.

You are entirely correct when you say that people should consider all the options whenever possible, and a responsible government should make information freely available to assist in informed decision making

Just because we have the capability of creating life artificially, does that automatically mean we should, or is there an ethical or moral debate to be had on this subject?

And how about artificially prolonging life?

However when it comes to public money being spent on artificial methods

Lots of the time it isn’t public money. My CCG doesn’t provide any IVF under the NHS (despite it being recommended by NICE) so we had to pay £6,000 to privately fund a single course of IVF with ICSI. I am sure Tom didn’t get his pregnancy done on the NHS either.

Should rich people be able to buy a baby?

(Would have been a better thread / topic for the Moral **** Maze.) Everyone immediately involved may end up happier, including the baby. But it feels unfair on people who can’t afford to buy one…

[EDIT: to say, sorry posted before seeing the post above so looks insensitive to say the least. Fwiw IVF is not in any way ‘buying a baby’, though it may be paying for healthcare which is a whole other topic. Paid surrogacy however may well be ‘buying a baby’. I’d personally expect society/the state/us to take an interest.)

Happy to be corrected as I don’t claim to be an expert in the methods of IVF. But as I understand it IVF is helping two people who cannot conceive naturally by fertilizing and egg and placing it back into the womb.

That is a world apart from two people who would not be able to conceive in any way naturally, paying to use someone else’s genetic material and to have a baby for them.

It is a tricky one though (assuming the would-be parents really want to have some kind of biological attachment)…

Fertile female + infertile male = sperm donor

Infertile female (but with functioning womb) + fertile male = egg donor

Infertile female (no functioning womb) + fertile male = surrogacy

Female + female = sperm donor

Male + male = surrogacy

Happy to be corrected as I don’t claim to be an expert in the methods of IVF. But as I understand it IVF is helping two people who cannot conceive naturally by fertilizing and egg and placing it back into the womb.

But what happens if (as my above examples) the would-be parents need donor egg or sperm? Infertility isn’t simply a case of not being able to get pregnant by conventional means without explanation (which can be a cause for unspecified infertility leading to IVF implantation).

And how about artificially prolonging life?

I’m not sure I can think of an example where this happens. Are you are referring to medical care and treatment that cures illness that would otherwise kill someone?

I’m not sure I can think of an example where this happens. Are you are referring to medical care and treatment that cures illness that would otherwise kill someone?

Any kind of medical intervention (for example, oxygen given to a person with pneumonia, stitches given to someone who fell drunkenly through a window and are mortally losing blood, putting a premature baby in a SCUBU, etc etc etc).

Any kind of medical intervention (for example, oxygen given to a person with pneumonia, stitches given to someone who fell drunkenly through a window and are mortally losing blood, putting a premature baby in a SCUBU, etc etc etc).

I don’t think you can class medical care as artificial life prolonging, in the same way that artificial insemination and surrogacy could be classed as artificial.

Just out of interest @johndoh, where do you stand on the designer baby debate? Is that ok too? We have the knowledge and technology to do it, so is that ok or is it none of your business.

Is this all just made up? Do you actually go around talking to adopted people about this? Seems a strange thing to do?

Of course I go around talking to adopted people – do you specifically make a point of NOT talking to adopted people? That would seem to be a very strange and rather prejudicial thing to do. What have you got against talking to people who were adopted?

Do you have the same discussions with people who are not adopted?

Again yes of course I do. The subject of identity, what it means to be the person you are, how you see yourself, how others see you and who you are really (and objectively) is something I spend a lot time exploring with other people. In fact I’ve created an entire website dedicated to this very subject.

And all that stuff about ‘hard wiring’ what do you actually mean?

I mean evolutionary biology and genetically inherited characteristics.

Just out of interest  @johndoh, where do you stand on the designer baby debate?

Define ‘designer baby’.

Define ‘designer baby’.

A baby conceived and engineered specifically to meet the desires or needs of the parent. That could be motivated by eugenics (desire) or to help a sibling through donation (need).

Define ‘designer baby’.

Genetically modified to order, “I want a baby with brown hair and blue eyes please”

Just to chip in, me and my partner (don’t worry Trailwagger, we’re not same sex) adopted two children, neither of which were babies. They have contact with siblings, no other birth family, but have photos of them and adoption is no secret in our house – we talk about things they remember from before they lived with us.

I guess my point is some of the arguments against the diving chaps kid seem to assume that the birth mum in this case will be a secret never to be mentioned, but you don’t know that. Growing up with a (for today’s standards, who knows in future)  “unconventional” family doesn’t automatically mean the kid’s going to be suffering from an identity crisis and and not know who they are.

Just to chip in, me and my partner (don’t worry Trailwagger, we’re not same sex)

How presumptuous of you to assume that I am homophobic!

Sorry, didn’t mean it, just for my own amusement.

I also wanted to make a comment about being surprised at Geetee being up in arms when I thought he’d be over the moon at a woman free family, but thought better of it.