Legal or ethical - Who is mother of the child? - Page 6

Originally posted by: JKSR

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.

I am not saying it's negative, I agree with you , provided both genders had to go through it. Not if women have to go through monthly periods, go through nausea and labour pain. This is not against men. I love my husband and he is a good man. Is it wrong if i feel it is unfair for one gender.

Originally posted by: The_Best

https://x.com/surrogconcern/status/1897923920252022833?s=46&t=Iip_qAKKvX1x0vBPTtQzyQ

Literally no conscience is possessed by the people who opt for surrogacy and also the people who support surrogacy. It's true that humans can be worst than animals , and some humans are prooving it over here.

Originally posted by: ThukkadRajaShah

Literally no conscience is possessed by the people who opt for surrogacy and also the people who support surrogacy. It's true that humans can be worst than animals , and some humans are prooving it over here.

Just like Abhira had to give Daksh back because Ruhi was the biological mother, Ruhi needs to give the baby because Abhira is the biological mother. A contract is signed to prevent issues such as these occurring after the birth. Ruhi can get attached all she wants but she needs to give the baby to Abhira/Armaan.

But we know what is going to happen soon.

Originally posted by: JKSR

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.

ChatGPT can make anything profound but it is no gift, especially in a nation like ours where we are ages behind other countries in terms of women's health and well being. To think and reflect of several practices is not looking at them negatively

See chatgpt will write positively for Sati Pratha too but as humans we have to keep our cultural and social context in mind when we discuss things

In an age where love was not measured in words but in sacrifice, Sati Pratha stood as the ultimate testament of a woman’s undying devotion. It wasn’t fear, it wasn’t force — it was the fierce fire of love that made a woman choose her husband’s pyre over a life without him.

Sati wasn’t about death — it was about a union that even death could not separate. A love so pure, so complete, that the soul refused to be parted. These women were not mourned, they were revered. Their love made them divine — worshipped as Sati Mata, protectors of the land, symbols of sacred commitment.

In a world of temporary bonds, Sati was the eternal vow — “If you burn, I burn. If you leave this world, I follow — because our love is not bound by breath, but by the soul.”

Originally posted by: ThukkadRajaShah

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.

MR at base involves force, yes, there is no criminal law against it and we need reforms but it can't be compared to surrogacy because forceful surrogacy isn't legal in India

Commercial surrogacy isn't legal as well

Discussing about surrogacy, I don't support it because a woman has to relinquish her rights over her body, this kind of ownership is dangerous and against article 21 of our constitution

But we can't say that baby belongs to surrogate mother because the process was done because intended parents want the child, if they are not getting the child, there won't be a surrogate

As for the baby, I have seen cases where mothers hate their own children due to postpartum depression, I have seen cases where biological parents abandon the child after surrogacy, I have seen cases where surrogate has no feelings for the child

So a blanket assumption that the child should be with surrogate is wrong for all the parties, what if surrogate mother doesn't want the child? What if she can't love someone else's child?

Legally and Biologically the child belongs to biological parents

A court can decide in favor of surrogate mother if biological parents are unfit to be parents

But surrogacy - and the child are two completely different discussion

Originally posted by: LoveMatters

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.

That's correct

There is this fixation on - Who is the mother? In the show, we were in joint family so my aunt, uncle...everyone took care of us, in a family, the child belongs to everyone not only the parents

But in the show, Abhira felt bad when Ruhi referred to her as Daksh's tai because she wanted to be Daksh's mother

Ruhi can be attached to the child then be its masi and love it as much as she can, why do you want that one relationship on paper?

Originally posted by: firewings_diya

yes actually in Ruhi's case ruhi agreed to become surrogate but in reality the woman may not have a choice.

In abhira's case since ruhi agreed to become surrogate the child belongs to both. Neither ruhi nor abhira has more rights on child considering even father does not delivary pain but we can not nullfiy his role in the child. Similarly if abhira can not give birth opting for surrogacy and surrogate agreed for it then both need to understand that it's difficult for both of them to get rid of attachments.

In a joint family, every relationship of the child is precious, only on ITV, I have seen these possessive parents. In real life, after delivery any mother would be happy to get rid of the baby for like 2 - 3 hours so she can rest

Like that recent promo - why can't Abhira or Armaan listen to the heartbeat 2 minutes later? No, she is not a mother anymore because she didn't get to listen to heartbeat first, being a mother is an emotional connection or a race to be the first?

Originally posted by: MsWhiskerson

So legality takes precedence over efforts of the individual? Because Ruhi is the one going through the ordeal of pregnancy

Now that she is not the mother, is she allowed to be careless? For example - she wants to forget pain of her losing husband and drink her pain away and considering the fact that the child isn't hers, can she go and drink because it is her body after all?

When Ruhi decided to be the surrogate, did she tell Abhimaan that she has the right over the baby or the baby will be hers after she delivers it? No. It's you all who are deciding that she deserves the baby just because she's carrying it. Let me ask you a question. What if roles had reversed and it was Abhira who was Ruhi's and Rohit's baby's surrogate? Would you have shown pity on her and say, hey Ruhi might be biological mom but as Abhira is carrying the baby hence she should be called the mother and not Ruhi, the mere egg donor? No. At that time you all would have called only Ruhi the baby's biological mother and would have expected Abhira to give the baby to her. Hai na?

Originally posted by: Life_Is_Dutiful

When Ruhi decided to be the surrogate, did she tell Abhimaan that she has the right over the baby or the baby will be hers after she delivers it? No. It's you all who are deciding that she deserves the baby just because she's carrying it. Let me ask you a question. What if roles had reversed and it was Abhira who was Ruhi's and Rohit's baby's surrogate? Would you have shown pity on her and say, hey Ruhi might be biological mom but as Abhira is carrying the baby hence she should be called the mother and not Ruhi, the mere egg donor? No. At that time you all would have called only Ruhi the baby's biological mother and would have expected Abhira to give the baby to her. Hai na?

When did I say Ruhi deserves the baby? Mine was an ethical question on a woman's right to her body, since the baby is not hers, is she allowed to do whatever she wants to do?