When a B.C. couple discovered that the fetus their surrogate mother was carrying was likely to be born with Down syndrome, they wanted an abortion. The surrogate, however, was determined to take the pregnancy to term, sparking a disagreement that has raised thorny questions about the increasingly common arrangements.
Under the agreement the trio signed, the surrogate’s choice would mean absolving the couple of any responsibility for raising the child, the treating doctor told a recent fertility-medicine conference.
The fetus was genetically the couple's and the surrogate did have an abortion because of her family obligations -- two children of her own.
The article contains comments from bioethicists and experts in surrogacy.
On the one hand: SHRIEEEEEK!!!1!1! Treating babies like commodities!
On the other: WTF!!!11!!11 Somebody else can decide whether a couple must raise a baby they don't want?
Back to the first hand: SHRIEEEEK!1!!!!! But it's perfectly OK to force a pregnant woman to have an abortion she doesn't want?
Other hand: Obviously, the three of them should have discussed this possibility beforehand and decided to go ahead or not based on whether they all agreed.
In any event, the Notional Pest is milking it. It is hosting a live online
discussion at 2 p.m. ET today.
UPPITY-DATE: Ewwwww. Babs Kay is on the panel and she's already got them calling the fetus an 'unborn baby'. I don't how much I can take of it. . .