Surrogate Motherhood as Prenatal Adoption

Many feel very strongly about the concept of monitoring a surrogacy pregnancy as a way to protect a baby from being born as part of one agreement when there was another, possibly intentionally, purpose behind the process from the beginning. This has also been referred to as using surrogate motherhood as prenatal adoption.

Much of this stems from an actual legal proceeding called the case of "Baby M", in which a surrogate was inseminated with a gentleman's sperm and agreed to be the surrogate for the couple's baby at an agreed upon price. However, once the baby was born and handed over to the couple, she changed her mind and asked the couple if she could have the baby back for a short time. The couple agreed as they were afraid the surrogate would hurt herself, however they had no idea that she had no intention of returning the child, she had just wanted the prenatal care. After hearings and rulings the final outcome was that the surrogate regained custody of the baby. Hence the term, surrogate motherhood as prenatal adoption.

This has caused many people feel that there should be a ban on surrogacy entirely, stating that surrogate mothers are compelled by poverty and monetary issues so they use their wombs to make a living. Their thinking is why else would they sell their child. All in all this may make a pretty good case for those who do look at surrogate motherhood as prenatal adoption.

There are also some people that are in an "on the fence" position; rather than banning surrogacy they feel that perhaps something similar to the fact that the monetary compensation the surrogate receives are not for selling the child but for her personal discomfort and risks, should be added to the contract between the parties. Of course this does not dissuade the argument that some of the candidates do use surrogate motherhood as prenatal adoption.

The argument wages on by some sides citing that a mother has the legal right to raise any child that she gives birth to, which is a type or right to privacy, which can not really be waived. However, since the courts have the right to enforce an adoption agreement, after the determined waiting period, even if the mother then decides to change her mind then they should be able to enforce these. They claim that just as postnatal adoptions can be enforced then perhaps even these unique situations should be enforceable.

Many of the anti-surrogacy defenders claim that even though they feel that it is morally wrong or even distasteful, it is not a sufficient enough reason to outlaw it completely. However, when the surrogate motherhood as prenatal adoption is used knowingly and willfully by the surrogate it should be considered legally wrong if everyone wants to treat surrogacy as a mere contract between two parties. The overall feeling is that surrogacy should be regulated in order to safeguard all parties that are involved.