Legal or ethical - Who is mother of the child? - Page 8

Originally posted by: Manny_123

In my opinion, Abheera is the mother of the child legally and ethically. I guess legality doesn't need to be explained here. If I speak of ethical dimension, Abheera-Armaan and Ruhi are involved consciously without any doubt in this surrogacy. so basically both parties know it and Ruhi is doing it out of free will not under anyone's influence. Yes the pain that the surrogacy mother goes through in terms of physical and emotional is immense but if we base this to negate and nullify the paternity rights of the bio parents that make unethical. As a surrogacy mother, Ruhi needs to acknowledge and accept that the baby that she is carrying does not belong to her and she is the baby's massi. She needs to set clear boundaries. That way the attachment that she will feel will be lessened and she needs to be respected by Abhimaan too for volunteering herself for carrying their kid.

Thank you so much for saying this. This is what I wanted to explain. Nobody forced or pressurized Ruhi to be the surrogate. She did it with her own will. Even now also if she wants, she can go for abortion and I don't think anyone will object to it considering the fact that she's going through the most painful phase of her life and it's going to affect her health as well as the baby's health. Just because she's carrying the baby in her womb for 9 months that doesn't mean the baby should go to her because it is both illegal as well as unethical.

Ruhi wasn't pressurized to be the surrogate nor is being pressurized to continue with the pregnancy so I don't know why people are behaving like everyone in the family is doing injustice with her. In fact it would be great if the family convinces her for abortion. If she wants to continue with the baby inspite of all that she's going through, she should rightfully give the baby to its biological parents after its born.

Originally posted by: nutmeg7

Importance dono ka rahega but the child legally and biologically belongs to Abhira only.

Now the problem will be Ruhi will get attached to the child and then kaand will start

Originally posted by: Manny_123

In my opinion, Abheera is the mother of the child legally and ethically. I guess legality doesn't need to be explained here. If I speak of ethical dimension, Abheera-Armaan and Ruhi are involved consciously without any doubt in this surrogacy. so basically both parties know it and Ruhi is doing it out of free will not under anyone's influence. Yes the pain that the surrogacy mother goes through in terms of physical and emotional is immense but if we base this to negate and nullify the paternity rights of the bio parents that make unethical. As a surrogacy mother, Ruhi needs to acknowledge and accept that the baby that she is carrying does not belong to her and she is the baby's massi. She needs to set clear boundaries. That way the attachment that she will feel will be lessened and she needs to be respected by Abhimaan too for volunteering herself for carrying their kid.

So you are saying that Ruhi has ethical responsibility to not keep the biological child of Abhira?

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.

In Ruhi’s case, she’s just the surrogate, not the real mother of AbhiMaan’s baby. The child is biologically Armaan and Abhira’s — not Ruhi’s, because her egg wasn’t used. So no DNA match there. Legally too, surrogacy agreements are clear — the intended parents (Abhira and Armaan) are the legal parents. Yes, Ruhi will carry the baby, go through the physical discomfort and emotions, and that’s valid — but she chose this knowing fully well the child isn’t hers. That doesn’t suddenly make her the mother. Motherhood isn't just about carrying a baby — it’s about biology, legal rights, and intent. Ruhi didn’t create this child, doesn’t have any claim over it, and won’t raise it. So no, she isn’t the “maa” here — she’s the carrier. Nothing more, nothing less.

If someone thinks surrogacy is wrong just because it involves one person carrying a child for another, they really need to pause and think from a broader perspective. Not everyone is lucky enough to conceive naturally — for many, surrogacy is the only chance at parenthood. It’s not about using someone; it’s about consent, choice, and mutual agreement. Ruhi consented to this, willingly. She's not being forced. So let’s not project age-old biases onto modern, legal, and emotionally complex decisions. Science has evolved. So have people. If you’re still stuck in the past, maybe try understanding the realities of those who can’t have children — their pain, their longing, and their right to become parents too.

Ru cannot go for a abortion legally until about and ar give her the release of I rem my contract law right. They need to consent

Originally posted by: Indira1211

now why will Ruhi get attached to this baby when she knows it’s not hers and she always intended to give it to abhimaan.

But she will still have to give it because it is not her baby.

Originally posted by: AnjuRish

Ru cannot go for a abortion legally until about and ar give her the release of I rem my contract law right. They need to consent

Yes until the biological parents give their consent Ruhi can't terminate her pregnancy. I hope they tell her to do so though specially if she's in her first trimester.

Originally posted by: MsWhiskerson

So you are saying that Ruhi has ethical responsibility to not keep the biological child of Abhira?

Yeah I would say that she needs to give the child to biological parents.

Ethical responsibility means following the morally correct path, maintaing honesty, fairness, and justice. After laying all the groundwork and going back from word/ contracts by a surrogacy mother means she is being dishonest and unfair and it is injustice to parents involved. She took this decision with free will with the intention of giving the child after the labour. In a way, the child's right to be with his/her bio parents will be violated and snatched. Taking responsibility also means you need to hold accountable for your actions. So you will need to be brave enough to accept whatever consequences of your action. People might have different views but this is what I think.

Originally posted by: Manny_123

Yeah I would say that she needs to give the child to biological parents.

Ethical responsibility means following the morally correct path, maintaing honesty, fairness, and justice. After laying all the groundwork and going back from word/ contracts by a surrogacy mother means she is being dishonest and unfair and it is injustice to parents involved. She took this decision with free will with the intention of giving the child after the labour. In a way, the child's right to be with his/her bio parents will be violated and snatched. Taking responsibility also means you need to hold accountable for your actions. So you will need to be brave enough to accept whatever consequences of your action. People might have different views but this is what I think.