natjack Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 This wont make me popular but here it is anyway. The couple possibly paid a lot of money, they want their goods to be in tip top condition as you would with anything. As its a human being and not a car you have to ask yourself, would you really want to take on a DS child who wasnt your own, change your life to accommodate, maybe give up your job, sell you home to care for the child? Knowing it will have a shorter life no matter what you do? Or do you want a perfectly healthy bouncing baby boy or girl? Who else's was it? The mother was a surrogate, nothing of the baby would have been hers, as is obvious from the pix. Although as she seems to be the only one feeling responsible for him, and seems to have feelings of love for him, he'd probably be best left with her, and the parents pay for his upkeep? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
algy Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 http://www.cbc-network.org/2010/10/commercial-surrogacy-is-human-trafficking-biological-parents-to-birth-mother-abort-down-fetus/ I repeat, sickening. Such contracts should be voided by public policy outlawing surrogacy for pay. I mean, if this isn’t human trafficking, what is it? Legalised child trafficking. Apparently surrogacy for money is illegal in Thailand. Take the money out of the equation and it still leaves an interesting moral question. A woman who carries her own child can decide to terminate if certain conditions are found. Should that right extend to their biological foetus when carried in another womb? The baby was diagnosed as having Down Syndrome in the womb and the couple asked the mother to have an abortion but she refused because she is a Buddhist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
natjack Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 The baby was diagnosed as having Down Syndrome in the womb and the couple asked the mother to have an abortion but she refused because she is a BuddhistWonder why they didn't sort all that sort of stuff out before they went ahead with the plan? You'd think so, wouldn't you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blake Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 people are not realising that the 'other' twin had significant health problems besides DS and DS was probably the least thing the absent Aussie parents were concerned about. They did not want to be landed with huge hospital bills to pay for the medical treatment to try to keep the kid alive. big story this incidentally Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncocker Posted August 5, 2014 Share Posted August 5, 2014 Is there anybody in australia and thailand checking out the backgrounds of these people who are so desperate to have children? quote/THE Australian man at the centre of the Thai surrogate abandoned baby row has multiple convictions for sexual offences against children. David John Farnell was jailed for three years in 1997 after admitting to sexually assaulting two young children. According to media reports from the time, the West Australian electrician, who was then 39, pleaded guilty to the sex crimes and had previously admitted to molesting two teenage girls 15 years earlier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jane91 Posted August 5, 2014 Share Posted August 5, 2014 This is beyond belief and makes me so sad, i would give anything to have a child be green, purple, orange or blue who cares Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted August 5, 2014 Share Posted August 5, 2014 Is there anybody in australia and thailand checking out the backgrounds of these people who are so desperate to have children? quote/THE Australian man at the centre of the Thai surrogate abandoned baby row has multiple convictions for sexual offences against children. David John Farnell was jailed for three years in 1997 after admitting to sexually assaulting two young children. According to media reports from the time, the West Australian electrician, who was then 39, pleaded guilty to the sex crimes and had previously admitted to molesting two teenage girls 15 years earlier. I don't think that it was a legal surrogacy, so it was carried out without the knowledge of the authorities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncocker Posted August 5, 2014 Share Posted August 5, 2014 I'm not sure what the law is in Thailand. I read somewhere that surrogacy was illegal unless the surrogate was a blood relative. If that's true, then the whole ' arrangement was illegal. A ban isn't going to help much if people are prepared to break the law anyway. Obviously it needs greater regulation- but how you do this with a nation as bent as Thailand? The irony here is that the baby is in a lot better position than most kids with similar disabilities born to poor parents in Thailand. btw/where are all the feminists on this?? Indian women , Thai women, US women, women all over the world are paid to carry Western couples' babies, obviously, men can't do this. So isn't this a feminist issue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dee02 Posted August 5, 2014 Share Posted August 5, 2014 all because the little boy had ds they didn't want him my experience with handicapped kids d no matter whats are so loving always show that they love you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eater Sundae Posted August 5, 2014 Share Posted August 5, 2014 I'm not sure what the law is in Thailand. I read somewhere that surrogacy was illegal unless the surrogate was a blood relative. If that's true, then the whole ' arrangement was illegal. A ban isn't going to help much if people are prepared to break the law anyway. Obviously it needs greater regulation- but how you do this with a nation as bent as Thailand? The irony here is that the baby is in a lot better position than most kids with similar disabilities born to poor parents in Thailand. btw/where are all the feminists on this?? Indian women , Thai women, US women, women all over the world are paid to carry Western couples' babies, obviously, men can't do this. So isn't this a feminist issue? I don't see it as a feminist issue. If both men and women could carry children, but only women ever did, then it might be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.