Dadisa's thinking

I have always looked at the scientific part of surrogacy so i never really bothered about the effects of the womb on baby...today Dadisa said that woman is very attached to her child which she carries for 9 months and it would be cruel to take the child from her after all the love and acre she gave to the child...i found it quiet baseless because i don't think surrogacy can ever be forced on any woman...it's has to be completely the choice of woman to become a surrogate mother and she do readily agree to sign some contracts which does not bring such attachment complications in future...right?

Well if we go by traditional thinking then many things that we do in today's world would be baseless/immoral/wrong.

If a woman agrees to become a surrogate of her own free will then what's wrong?

Though I must say surrogacy is a shady area, especially in Asian countries where laws barely cover rights and privacy of the surrogate.

If women are forced, exploited, made to go through this frequently just so they fetch more money and are not well taken care of in terms of health, have no privacy etc. then it is not right.

But if a woman is willing then maybe it's not wrong.

Look, if you have such views as DS had then you should not be desperate or sorry either and learn to accept fate also just as traditional thinking dictates.

You don't want to adopt. You're hung up on apna khoon. Then there's only one option left unless you want that woman to go ahead with her pregnancy and Devi Maa do miracles to save both mother and child.

In mythology also there are instances of many babies who weren't born in natural manner, didn't have a proper womb or even the father's sperm. But kids were had no?

I don't believe womb passes sanskar to a child otherwise good women wouldn't have wayward kids and no one wants their kids to be ill mannered.

However I do believe the woman who keeps child in her womb develops some kind of attachment to it and it can be very hard for her to part with it or not even see the one who she kept in her womb for 9 months. A surrogate has to make herself hard hearted and tough to take it as a business/task only and keep emotion out. I really wonder how the women who do this job, do it in first place! How do they hold themselves together and manage their emotions?

Some customers are kind enough and let the surrogate interact with the child or even employ the surrogate in their household. But I don't know if a woman needs to be "re-paid" throughout lifetime for the 9 months for which she lent her womb for the child.

Surrogacy, egg/sperm donation etc. are highly debatable issues.

I think one has to prepare themselves for what they want. In some cases you just have to harden yourself, detach and look at things in a business-like manner - to get what you want or need. Tradition/notions of morality or feelings of heart and one's needs and means to achieve them cannot always go hand in hand.

For me, I won't judge a person harshly if he has treated the surrogate well and gotten a child (because they had no other option left).

This apna khoon and other such craze about the kind of child people want are the reasons why practices like surrogacy exist.

If you're so much into morals then drop your craze.

Otherwise make a compromise on your notions/values/tradition and get what you want or need.

We're not forcing a surrogate to do what she does. She's doing it for her own needs/compulsions and if you don't take her services then someone else will.

Thinking has to be moulded to deal with guilt or weirdness one feels in such matters.

DS is not entirely wrong either if emotions creep in judgement of this matter apart from its scientific and practical explanation.

I still feel if surrogate has no problem and is accustomed to not developing emotional attachment to the foetus then what's the need for DS types to feel so much?

Some things have to be looked at devoid of other considerations. In past people had problems with blood transfusion, organ transplant etc. too. But these are routine practices now.

We must face it that whatever we do has evolved out of serving needs only. Even customs and traditions have roots in needs. Not everything that we do is entirely moral, altruist and devoid of selfishness.

It boils down to people's choices.

A child doesn't get its values from mother's womb. As the child after birth grows, the mother nurtures the child and instills values to the child, teaching the child to differentiate from right and wrong. But I do believe that a child is very much attached to its mother and can recognize its mother very well. Women who are surrogate mothers themselves agree to become one as they get paid. I believe Surrogate mothers should be taken care of separately. But keeping her at the actual mother's house after birth of the child may not be a good idea because then it might be harder for the surrogate mother to separate from the child.

In mythology also there is sonething like surrogate. Balram was conceived by Devki but the egg was transferred to Rohini, the first wife of vasudev while Devki and vasudev were in prison.

Dadisa is not completely wrong about surrogacy, it's a very hard decision where the outcome can be opposite to what you expect. It sounds easy on paper but it playing with hormones, a woman may go into it with good intention but carrying a baby for 9 months and then giving birth and then letting go is a hard process. Best candidate is usually a woman who has had her own children and is content with her family and is willing to do it for someone else, it never a good idea for someone who has never had they own children yet as they haven't experienced the process. Also it must be hard to watch your surrogate carry the baby for you, since you won't have the full experience.

Thanks to all the people for your replies...it helped me a lot to understand surrogacy from different POV

I have heard that even law cannot do anything if the surrogate mother later develops attachment to the child and doesn't want to give the child. So i guess that's a real problem. Other thing about getting values from womb, i don't believe that. I think DS is just having a old world thought process. But that being said i have heard many highly educated ppl also saying that the genes matter. But in a surrogacy, child will have only the genes of real parents, not the surrogate mother.

Interesting post, personally I am against the surrogacy idea as it is a mental torture for the surrogate mother, and the parents. Also surrogacy is reinforcing the belief that apna khoon is apna khoon.

Originally posted by: libsrocks

I have always looked at the scientific part of surrogacy so i never really bothered about the effects of the womb on baby...today Dadisa said that woman is very attached to her child which she carries for 9 months and it would be cruel to take the child from her after all the love and acre she gave to the child...i found it quiet baseless because i don't think surrogacy can ever be forced on any woman...it's has to be completely the choice of woman to become a surrogate mother and she do readily agree to sign some contracts which does not bring such attachment complications in future...right?

Next Dadisa said a child gets it's values and love from mother's womb so it does matter whose womb the child was born from...is it true or just some blind faith? i never looked at surrogacy from traditional POV so i don't know that such thing does matter or not? what do you all think?...was Dadisa right in saying that apart from the health of the woman even the nature of womb matters for the child?