i.e. visitation rights, etc.
2007-03-13 02:31:50 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Pregnancy & Parenting ➔ Parenting
A friend of mine is a parent of a child that a surrogate carried for them. They are very thankful to her for what she did but No I do not feel the surrogate mom should have rights to the child. There are to many cases where surrogates attempt to take the child, refuse to give it up and so forth. You sign a contract stating you will give up all rights to the child at birth and it should be stuck to. In my friends case it was her eggs and her husbands sperm this isnt always the case the surrogate had no biological relationship to the child
2007-03-13 03:23:36 · answer #1 · answered by texas_angel_wattitude 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No - that's not the deal that gets made when someone agrees to be a surrogate. The deal is supposed to be that from conception on the baby is not the baby of the surrogate at all, and the surrogate is just supposed to carry the baby for "the parents". If a surrogate isn't capable of doing this she shouldn't be a surrogate.
2007-03-13 02:43:28 · answer #2 · answered by WhiteLilac1 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think it depends on the situation. If the surrogate was a family member, then of course they should be allowed to see the child but if the surrogate was through a surrogate service, then no they should have any parental rights to this child.
It should be very similar to a sperm donor situation. When a man donates sperm he has no parental rights over any child that may come from his donation. Same rules should apply for surrogacy.
2007-03-13 02:40:12 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
no. i do not. how confusing for the child.
a surrogate, is just that. its like renting a room at a hotel. after you rent that room, and you leave, should you still be able to come back when you want? i dont think so.
i think that if you are a surrogate mother, and you are friends with the family, then you can hang out together, but i dont think that if you were strangers before, you should just get visitation, just like that.
now, if you and the family have become close, then maybe, they will let you come over to see the child, but i dont think that they owe it to you, and that if they dont want to, then they dont have to. they already paid you for your services... no be gone...
2007-03-13 02:38:57 · answer #4 · answered by smcopeland16 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No I don't , the surrogate was paid to have this child for someone else, therefore she gave her rights away for that child, all the surrogate does is carry the child so no I don't think they should have visitation because it is not their child.
2007-03-13 06:21:35 · answer #5 · answered by Urchin 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
absolutely not. she knew what she was getting into in the first place! It is not her child, she has no rights to it. This is why most surrogates have to go through an intense screening process.
2007-03-13 02:44:58 · answer #6 · answered by autumnofserenity@sbcglobal.net 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
absolutely not. she knows the "rules" going into it, and I think that puts absolutely too much strain on the child.
i think surrogate mothers are angels, i really do, but they should not be doing it to have rights to the baby after...they should have their own children in that case.
2007-03-13 03:35:53 · answer #7 · answered by Taken by a Texan 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well, she knew that the baby wasnt going to be hers, that she would have to give it up when its born, she agreed to having the baby for someone else, so she knew what it pertained to. Seeing the child every now and then would be alright but not visitation rights.
2007-03-13 03:04:04 · answer #8 · answered by Jennifer H 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, I do not. Because they are surrogate for a reason.
2007-03-13 06:36:04 · answer #9 · answered by Mom to Foster Children 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Should automatically? No..but the there may be an agreement of both parties agree to it.
2007-03-13 03:13:39 · answer #10 · answered by KathyS 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋