Outside the Bounds of Money..

In looking at the issue of surrogate motherhood, it is not necessarily a bad thing. However, the reasons for such a decision are in vast array that it brings into question the placement of a line…what is acceptable and what is not acceptable? Surrogacy is an option often looked toward when a woman is unable to carry a child herself due to abnormalities in her uterus, a hysterectomy, or even health conditions that makes it dangerous for her to be pregnant or give birth.
However outside of the health concerns of the woman, couples also look for surrogate mothers in situations when the woman has no desire for pregnancy or sees it as an inconvenience rather than a miracle of intimacy with her unborn child. In these cases a surrogate mother is used not out of need but convenience. Surrogacy is wrong when it is abused in such circumstances. I believe the situation where a woman is unable to carry a child to term is more viable than that of a woman who finds pregnancy inconvenient and therefore hires someone to carry her child. When funds are involved it becomes a business deal and the legality of such an issue is difficult to determine. In this “rent-a-womb” situation the legal action leaves room for countless problems, as evident by a dispute that arose between a surrogate mother and a California couple a few years ago (http://archives.cnn.com/2001/LAW/08/13/surrogate.dispute/index.html ). But should we say surrogacy is completely wrong? No, I don’t think that is the case. What of the loving sister, of a woman who cannot carry her own child, who says “I want to do this for you”. Like giving a kidney to someone you care about, it is done outside a contract and the bounds of money. When it is done out of love it’s a different story… Regardless of the situation, it is not for the government to decide; that decision lies within the hands of individual people and the ones they love.