Blog | Subscribe | Free Trial | Contact Us | Cart | Donate | Planned Giving
Log In | Search
facebook
rss
twitter
  • CURRENT
    • Winter 2025 PDF
    • WINTER 2025 HTML
    • THE HUMAN LIFE REVIEW HTML COLLECTION PAGE
    • NEWSworthy: What’s Happening and What It Means to You
    • Blog
    • Pastoral Reflections
    • About Us
  • DINNER
    • GREAT DEFENDER OF LIFE DINNER 2024: NEW MEDIA ADDED!
    • Great Defender of Life 50th Anniversary Dinner Ticket 2024
    • Great Defender of Life 50th Anniversary Dinner TABLE for TEN Ticket 2024
    • Great Defender of Life 2024 Young Adult / Pregnancy Center Staffer Tickets
    • HOST COMMITTEE Great Defender of Life Dinner 2024
    • DINNER JOURNAL ADVERTISING 2024
    • ARCHIVE: GREAT DEFENDER OF LIFE DINNER 2023
  • ARCHIVE
    • Archive Spotlight
    • ISSUES IN HTML FORMAT
  • LEGACY
    • Planned Giving: Wills, Trusts, and Gifts of Stock
  • SHOP
    • Your Cart: Shipping is ALWAYS Free!

Hot Topic: Surrogacy

At a recent screening of Breeders in Minnesota, several former surrogates protested the film
3 Comments

Surrogates and Surrogate-conceived Children Speak Out

Christopher White
surrogacy
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

 

 

Last week ABC’s Nightline aired a special on commercial surrogacy, prominently featuring the Center for Bioethics and Culture’s new documentary film, Breeders: A Subclass of Women? The documentary features a number of women who served as surrogates for other couples and now feel as if they were misled or wronged in the process. They’re speaking out to warn other women not to follow in their footsteps.

At a recent screening of Breeders in Minnesota, several former surrogates protested the film (as can be seen in the Nightline segment). They claim that empowered women can make decisions for themselves about whether or not to serve as surrogates and that the state—or any other organization or individual—shouldn’t be able to get in their way. These women fail to mention that they were also the likely beneficiaries of large payouts for their services; in fact they refused to discuss the financial arrangements of their surrogacies on camera.

Surrogacy never concerns just one person’s decision-making capacity. In addition to the women involved, the process also affects the children conceived through this method, and a host of other individuals. As one of the surrogate mothers in Breeders recalls, those most disturbed by her decision to be a surrogate were her own children, who couldn’t understand how their pregnant mother could intend to give away the child she was carrying. “Might, on some future occasion,” these youngsters wondered, “we be given away, too?”

The enterprise of commercial surrogacy has institutionalized a process that makes possible—and legal—the buying and selling of children. This marketplace has few protections to ensure the health and wellbeing of these children, or that of the women who choose to carry them. Furthermore, the entire practice of surrogacy is promoted by big business fertility clinics that offer enticing payouts of $25,000 to $30,000 to lure women into the practice. Such large sums of money can cloud judgment and make it almost impossible for these women to truly offer informed consent.

Some critics believe that “breeders” is too harsh a term to use in describing surrogate mothers. And on that we’re in agreement, though they seem to miss the point. As the experiences of the women in Breeders reveal, the surrogacy process is more often than not fraught with both emotional and physical risk. Surrogate mothers are frequently reduced to “carriers”—a dehumanizing term meant to depersonalize the process.

With such little respect for these women, it’s no wonder that children who come into the world due to such arrangements are more likely to suffer adjustment difficulties and heightened psychological risks, to which Jessica Kern—a surrogacy-conceived child who appears in the film—attests. I’d imagine that if studies were done on the women carrying these children for intended parents, they might reveal many of the same risks.

Unfortunately, we’re unlikely to learn more about this any time soon. As the protestors in Minnesota know very well, there’s too much money available to seduce vulnerable women into participating in the practice, and too little attention being paid to efforts to inform them about the potential harms at stake.

*     *     *     *     *

Christopher White is Director of Research and Education at the Center for Bioethics and Culture.

A full interview with Breeders Director and Producer, Jennifer Lahl, can be found in the Spring 2014 issue of the Human Life Review here.

1,385 people have visited this page. 1 have visited this page today.

Social Share

  • google-share

3 Comments

  1. Pingback: Surrogates Speaking Up and Speaking Out

  2. Thomas Hiller October 28, 2023 at 5:07 pm Reply

    What a horrible piece written by someone unaffected by surrogacy for good or ill.

    He could be advocating for protections for children or surrogates, but instead rides roughshod over even their most simple wish not to be called a “breeder.”

    He discounts surrogates’ lived experience (clouded judgement by money? So all work for pay is coercion?) and has no respect for these women or the children that can only exist because of their good will.

  3. Pingback: The Human Life Review Pope Francis Highlights Problems of Surrogacy in Calling for Global Ban - The Human Life Review

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Comments will not be posted until approved by a moderator in an effort to prevent spam and off-topic responses.

*
*

captcha *

Get the Human Life Review

subscribe to HLR
The-Human-Life-Foundation
DONATE TODAY!

Recent Posts

IVF: The Frozen Sleep Evading Time

07 May 2025

Report: "The Abortion Pill Harms Women"

05 May 2025

New York Pushes Asissted Suicide

30 Apr 2025

CURRENT ISSUE

Alexandra DeSanctis Anne Conlon Anne Hendershott Bernadette Patel Brian Caulfield Christopher White Clarke D. Forsythe Colleen O’Hara Connie Marshner David Mills David Poecking David Quinn Diane Moriarty Dr. Donald DeMarco Edward Mechmann Edward Short Ellen Wilson Fielding Fr. Gerald E. Murray George McKenna Helen Alvaré Jacqueline O’Hara Jane Sarah Jason Morgan Joe Bissonnette John Grondelski Kristan Hawkins Madeline Fry Schultz Maria McFadden Maffucci Marvin Olasky Mary Meehan Mary Rose Somarriba Matt Lamb Nat Hentoff Nicholas Frankovich Peter Pavia Rev. George G. Brooks Rev. Paul T. Stallsworth Rev. W. Ross Blackburn Stephen Vincent Tara Jernigan Ursula Hennessey Victor Lee Austin Vincenzina Santoro Wesley J. Smith William Murchison

Shop 7 Weeks Coffee--the Pro-Life Coffee Company!
Support 7 Weeks Coffee AND the Human Life Foundation!
  • Issues
  • Human Life Foundation Blog
  • About Us
  • Free Trial Issue
  • Contact Us
  • Shop
  • Planned Giving
  • Annual Human Life Foundation Dinner

Follow Us On Twitter

Follow @HumanLifeReview

Find Us On Facebook

Human Life Review/Foundation

Search our Website

Contact Information

The Human Life Foundation, Inc.
The Human Life Review
271 Madison Avenue, Room 1005
New York, New York 10016
(212) 685-5210

Copyright (c) The Human Life Foundation.