Abortion All News Children Family Love and Sexuality

Marriage Redefinition Consequences for the Unborn

MRM ANALYSIS: The breakdown and redefinition of marriage and family have severed the rights of children to be raised in a family with their own mother and father united in marriage. They have led to a new trend that treats children as objects for the fulfillment of adults, intentionally deprives them of fundamental human rights, and can even expose some of these children to the risk of abortion when tangled artificial reproduction technology arrangements go awry. We are speaking about rapidly expanding use of donor conception.

The practice started as a means of helping infertile married couples have children, but the Donor Sibling Registry reports that today, only 20 percent of the parents in their database are couples with fertility problems. Fifty percent are single women and 33 percent are same-sex couples. In 1988, before this new trend started, the Office of Technology Assessment estimated 30,000 children were born through donor insemination. No statistics have been kept and their have not been any estimates since. No one  really knows what the number is today. It is a free for all.

From the child’s perspective, donor conception is conceiving children with the intention of depriving them of the fundamental human right of knowing and being in relationship with their father, mother or both. When the reality of marriage is recognized by law and society, it become the sole institution that unites children with their mother and father (the meaning and purpose of marriage). Can you see that there is no reason for such a public institution as long as depriving children is an accepted practice? How can our children learn the importance of marrying before having children when it is accepted to conceive children as a single woman or man through surrogacy?

The story below makes donor conceived children visible through a horrifying legal battle that puts the life of the child in jeopardy. Our good friend Jennifer Lahl of the Center for Bioethics and Culture says donor conception has become a “human breeding industry.” Jennifer who does a great job of daylighting these pracrtices around the world and the related exploitation of donors and surrogates as well as resulting children. But humans are not animals that can be bred. These atrocities result in the birth of persons from who have had part of their identity stollen. Through out their lives they will be asking, “Who is my mom or who is my dad?”  Let’s not forget these children as we walk and march for life this week.

Sperm donor sues to force surrogate mother to abort one of her triplets

The sordid realities and ethical nightmares of surrogacy are coming to light

A new California lawsuit is revealing the sordid realities and ethical nightmares that lie behind so-called surrogate motherhood — the practice, legal in 22 states, in which women are allowed to sell their own or other women’s biological children in exchange for cash payments in the tens of thousands of dollars.

As revealed recently by PEOPLE Magazine and the New York Post, a Georgia sperm donor known in court papers only as “C.M.” is attempting to force a California woman to abort one of three triplets she is carrying because he paid for only one of them.

According to the article, “C.M.” paid a 47-year-old mother of four, Melissa Cook (photo), US $33,000 to bear for him a child conceived from his sperm and eggs donated by a 20-year-old woman.

In the past, so-called “surrogate motherhood” involved women selling their own biological children for money.

The women would conceive through artificial insemination (IVF), for a fee, and then turn their biological children over to whoever had paid for them — often to a male and female couple who could not conceive a child but increasingly, in recent years, to gay men who also want to raise children.

However, technology has advanced to the point that doctors can now implant eggs and sperm in a true surrogate mother — a third woman who is not genetically connected to the child but who carries it in her womb until birth.

However, one of the dirty secrets of IVF generally and of surrogate motherhood in particular is that doctors often create more embryos than can be safely carried to term. The doctors often destroy in the womb the “extra” embryos, weeding them out like carrots in a garden.

This is the dilemma in Cook’s case.

She ended up carrying triplets and the Georgia man who paid her — a 49-year-old postal worker who lives with his parents — wants only one of the children.

He wanted the court to force Cook, who is now 23 weeks pregnant, to kill one of the unborn children through abortion. He apparently planned to give up the second child through adoption.

However, Cook replied that she wanted to seek custody of the third “extra” child, not kill it through abortion, as “C.M.” wanted.

According to People, the Georgia postal worker’s attorney wrote to the pregnant woman, Cook, and said that “her refusal to undergo an abortion would make her liable ‘for large money damages.'”

[This] is the world that America’s callous abortion regime and legal culture has created. Children are not commodities that can be bought and sold on the open market — and killed at will in utero.

“I have a deep empathy for men who want children,” Cook said in a statement released to PEOPLE. “However, I now think that the basic concept of surrogacy arrangements must be re-examined, scrutinized and reconsidered.”

The New York Post, which claims to have broken the story about Cook, is campaigning against the sordid practices behind surrogate motherhood.

“It amounts to a human breeding industry, where women are paid anywhere from $25,000 to $50,000 to give birth to other people’s children — not to mention the exorbitant fees for lawyers and ‘placement’ agencies,” wrote Jennifer Lahl in the Post right before Christmas.

Lahl added that, as in Cook’s case, “US contract law is being used to try to forcibly terminate healthy babies.”

She also pointed that the European Parliament, which has long been skeptical of baby selling through surrogacy, in late December condemned the practice, calling it an exploitation of mostly poor, vulnerable women.

Robert J. Hutchinson is the author, most recently, of Searching for Jesus: New Discoveries in the Quest for Jesus of Nazareth. He lives in the United States.

Originally posted by our friends at Mercatornet.

Creative Commons License
This article is published by Robert Hutchinson and under a Creative Commons license. You may republish it or translate it free of charge with attribution for non-commercial purposes following the guidelines on that website. If you teach at a university we ask that your department make a donation. Commercial media must contact us for permission and fees. Some articles on this site are published under different terms.