Legal or ethical - Who is mother of the child? - Page 3

Originally posted by: ThukkadRajaShah

Bold: That is basically surrogacy in a nutshell and I am strongly against surrogacy. It’s ridiculous and shows sickness of the human mind to go any extent for own selfish reasons.

As for abheera armaan , they are just negative characters in the name of leads. Kya hi comment karein.

I am against surrogacy as well but talking about the baby - the baby belongs to biological parents

Originally posted by: LoveMatters

Legally and ethically Abhira is the mother of the child. Period. Roohi agreed to Surrogacy on her own will and was not forced into it. Contract was signed. In other countries a lawyer is involved as well and there are lot of legal formalities surrogate needs to go through so she can never claim the child.

Legally and Biologically yes

Ethically - I don't think so because if we consider ethics then what do we say about Ruhi's rights to her body? The baby is not hers, ethically as well so she has no obligations towards it, so is she allowed to be careless?

When a woman is carrying the child, wouldn't she be cautious because she has an attachment and that attachment is because her hormones are involved, she is transferring nutrients, microbiome, and immunity to the child through placenta

What she can't transfer is genes but every other part of her body is involved

Ethics of it is a different discussion

Originally posted by: MsWhiskerson

I am against surrogacy as well but talking about the baby - the baby belongs to biological parents

Law can sometimes lag behind ethics. Likewise we don't have a law on m@rital rape , does that mean it's right ? No. Even though the law says otherwise , ethically the baby belongs to the mother who 'gives it life'.

What I mean to say is even though the law may not condemn something but still we deem wrong as wrong. Likewise surrogacy may be allowed by law but in reality the surrogate is the real mother.

Originally posted by: ThukkadRajaShah

It's so disgusting when people defend and justify evil practices and call them 'ethical'. The audacity...

I am not sure I justify but I feel if people are willing on their own will due to financial reasons, or due to love there is nothing wrong. It is definitely wrong if someone is forced into it. I know you have different opinion on this but I see it from different perspective. Ofcourse adoption is also option in this case where surrogacy needs to be used. But I leave that to people's choice.

Originally posted by: MsWhiskerson

Legally and Biologically yes

Ethically - I don't think so because if we consider ethics then what do we say about Ruhi's rights to her body? The baby is not hers, ethically as well so she has no obligations towards it, so is she allowed to be careless?

When a woman is carrying the child, wouldn't she be cautious because she has an attachment and that attachment is because her hormones are involved, she is transferring nutrients, microbiome, and immunity to the child through placenta

What she can't transfer is genes but every other part of her body is involved

Ethics of it is a different discussion

Your right that's why she will love her as maasi/chachi. It's completely natural to get attached as here even money was not involved. It was out of love. But she can love her as favorite maasi of the child instead of claiming to be mom.

But this is not going to happen as makers want drama. The reason Rohit died only is to make Roohi negative.

Originally posted by: ThukkadRajaShah

It's so disgusting when people defend and justify evil practices and call them 'ethical'. The audacity...

It’s evil when something is done forcefully, through threats, or to someone who doesn’t fully understand what they’re doing. However, none of that applies in this case. When someone acts of their own free will, with complete awareness, it’s unfair to label others as inhuman or evil.

Yes, people strive for biological children—no one can deny that. It’s easy to make judgments, but when faced with such situations, humans often explore every possible avenue to have their own child. That’s why Abhira tried IVF, even disregarding initial pregnancy complications. Unfortunately, it didn’t work for her. There’s nothing wrong with pursuing other methods to fulfill this wish, as long as one is genuine and transparent with the surrogate.

Advanced medical science has made this possible, and it’s important not to label it as evil. It’s not inherently wrong—it only becomes evil when it’s abused.

Originally posted by: JKSR

It’s evil when something is done forcefully, through threats, or to someone who doesn’t fully understand what they’re doing. However, none of that applies in this case. When someone acts of their own free will, with complete awareness, it’s unfair to label others as inhuman or evil.

Yes, people strive for biological children—no one can deny that. It’s easy to make judgments, but when faced with such situations, humans often explore every possible avenue to have their own child. That’s why Abhira tried IVF, even disregarding initial pregnancy complications. Unfortunately, it didn’t work for her. There’s nothing wrong with pursuing other methods to fulfill this wish, as long as one is genuine and transparent with the surrogate.

Advanced medical science has made this possible, and it’s important not to label it as evil. It’s not inherently wrong—it only becomes evil when it’s abused.

In this obsession for a biological child , people become blind enough to inflict immense physical and mental torture on some third person. No matter how much desperate, no one has the right to make someone else suffer for their own selfish interests.

The rakshasi/demonic instinct. Get it by hook or crook , morals and ethics are dismissed for the sake of desires.

I wish advanced medical science could instill humanity in people.

Originally posted by: ThukkadRajaShah

In this thriving for a biological child , people become blind enough to inflict immense physical and mental torture on some third person. No matter how much desperate, no one has the right to make someone else suffer for their own selfish interests.

The rakshasi/demonic instinct. Get it by hook or crook , morals and ethics are dismissed for the sake of desires.

I wish advanced medical science could instill humanity in people.

Let’s agree to disagree on this. I’ve clearly stated that as long as it’s not forced, it doesn’t constitute torture or align with the claims being made. Everyone’s perspective is valid, but this is where I stand.

Originally posted by: JKSR

Let’s agree to disagree on this. I’ve clearly stated that as long as it’s not forced, it doesn’t constitute torture or align with the claims being made. Everyone’s perspective is valid, but this is where I stand.

I would say childbirth in a marriage is more torture, because there is no monetary benefit, also you are expected to cook for your husband. Atleast in surrogacy, it's out of your choice and not something mandatory you have to do.

Originally posted by: Abhirasharma

I would say childbirth in a marriage is more torture, because there is no monetary benefit, also you are expected to cook for your husband. Atleast in surrogacy, it's out of your choice and not something mandatory you have to do.

Childbirth is a profound and transformative journey—one that embodies strength, love, and the miracle of life. It is an experience unique to women, marking a deep connection between a mother and her child. While anything that is forced upon someone is undoubtedly inhumane, the act of bringing life into the world, when embraced with readiness and love, should be celebrated rather than feared. Surrogacy, too, is a path that allows the gift of life to be shared, offering hope to those who may not experience childbirth themselves. Instead of looking at these things as painful or negative, we should recognize the love and strength they represent.