News Forum - Thailand is revising surrogacy laws to allow foreigners to hire Thais to bear children

[Marc26]

8 hours ago, Stonker said:

Well, I suppose with prostitution they're selling themselves for a limited period, but with surrogacy they're selling their babies for ever.

I don't really see how the former can be any less acceptable morally than the latter.

I don't know if I would call it immoral

And the way you posed it, I don't think you are either??

 

But thinking about it

It is almost like buying a pure bread dog over adopting

 

I wouldn't say that is immoral, but there are ample dogs to be adopted 

[Cabra]

13 hours ago, Tim_Melb said:

Paid surrogacy in the United States is all about extracting money out of foreigners too is it? 

This article is about Thailand changing its surrogacy laws to grease the skids for medical tourism (i.e., it's about money). 

[Lowseasonlover]

Wasn't there one recently were she refused to hand over the baby?

[Benroon]

16 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

Prostitution is illegal but this is ok?

Surrogacy is essentially a woman renting out their body to someone else for money. How is that different?

Wtf ??? 

I would have thought the difference was blindingly obvious or is that a wind up ? 

Here’s your starter for 10 - sex involved in the first one, no sex in the second one amongst numerous others!

 

[Benroon]

17 hours ago, Sandbar said:

How low can you stoop to make a coin from a women's body for the sake of making money for the economy?

Again baffling - she is providing a child to couples who cannot conceive themselves. She makes a living whilst the couple provide a presumably secure future for THEIR child fulfilling their lives too.  It’s a legally binding arrangement (if done correctly). Going with your logic should all kidney, cornea, lungs, liver transplants be halted ? That makes money too for the hospitals/surgeons right ? 

Why shouldn’t she be paid ? It’s 9 months work, possibly sickness etc. should she do it for free or let’s ban all surrogacy and ramp up child abduction ? 

Jesus sometimes…..

[Benroon]

1 hour ago, Lowseasonlover said:

Wasn't there one recently were she refused to hand over the baby?

That’s why you get a good lawyer, and in an established hospital with procedures, the baby is essentially taken from the birth so that doesn’t happen. 

I would have thought pretty upsetting for the surrogate but that’s the deal she signed up for. 

[Benroon]

15 hours ago, Chriscpg said:

It's all about how Thailand can extract more money out of foreigners. Period!!

and ?

Ffs - dozens and dozens of countries have medical and even more have dental tourism. It’s a perfectly legitimate industry providing wealth, health and boosts to the economy via fees and  jobs etc etc from medical to transportation to hotels and beyond. People get better, or have their dreams fulfilled or circumvent limitations in their own countries. Where’s the problem ? 

Why are you picking out Thailand for your unbalanced vitriol ? I’m genuinely intrigued ..

[AdvocatusDiaboli]

20 hours ago, Thaiger said:

Under the proposed changes, foreigners will also be allowed to bring the eggs and sperm out of Thailand for surrogacy overseas. Revisions to the law are aimed at promoting Thailand as a medical hub, gaining more income for the country.

But is it enough to counter balance the effect low birth rate it will have on Thailand, which will affect generations to come. 
https://www.bangkokpost.com/thailand/general/2264075/low-birth-rate-worries-experts

Yes, surrogacy may provide money in the short term for some, but majority will end up paying for it.

[Guest1]

3 hours ago, Lowseasonlover said:

Wasn't there one recently were she refused to hand over the baby?

That could be a illegal task, then, with the law changed: Officially renting out the body, uterus, getting official money for it, helps not to damage the image of Thailand?

[riclag]

The young lady of the house cousin had a baby for a Chinese couple just before the china virus hit! They paid her 400k  plus all expenses ! She gave birth in China.

I’m told she thinks of her baby often.

[Tim_Melb]

14 hours ago, Stonker said:

Well, I suppose with prostitution they're selling themselves for a limited period, but with surrogacy they're selling their babies for ever.

I don't really see how the former can be any less acceptable morally than the latter.

Surrogacy can also be a woman carrying an embryo that she has no genetic connection to, to term. As in the egg and sperm come from a couple where the woman can't carry the baby to term but she still produces normal eggs. 

[Stonker]

1 hour ago, Tim_Melb said:

Surrogacy can also be a woman carrying an embryo that she has no genetic connection to, to term. As in the egg and sperm come from a couple where the woman can't carry the baby to term but she still produces normal eggs. 

Agreed absolutely, but I still don't see how that's so different to prostitution morally or ethically, except it's putting up with what's inside you from someone else for rather longer - nine months instead of maybe nine minutes.

Edit:

I'm not suggesting either are wrong, although I think some people can handle them better than others, just that I don't see the big deal over one being a 'better' or somehow more legitimate service than the other.

 

[Benroon]

3 hours ago, AdvocatusDiaboli said:

But is it enough to counter balance the effect low birth rate it will have on Thailand, which will affect generations to come. 
https://www.bangkokpost.com/thailand/general/2264075/low-birth-rate-worries-experts

Yes, surrogacy may provide money in the short term for some, but majority will end up paying for it.

I can't think of a single reason why the two are even connected? 

[Benroon]

3 hours ago, Guest1 said:

That could be a illegal task, then, with the law changed: Officially renting out the body, uterus, getting official money for it, helps not to damage the image of Thailand?

Does it damage any of the other countries that do it ? Have you or anyone you know refused to visit a country due to their surrogacy laws ? 

No didn't think so - there is absolutely nothing morally or legally wrong with the whole process, unless you have an unfeasibly intolerant attitude to the well being of your fellow human beings.

[Benroon]

47 minutes ago, Stonker said:

Agreed absolutely, but I still don't see how that's so different to prostitution morally or ethically, except it's putting up with what's inside you from someone else for rather longer - nine months instead of maybe nine minutes.

Edit:

I'm not suggesting either are wrong, although I think some people can handle them better than others, just that I don't see the big deal over one being a 'better' or somehow more legitimate service than the other.

I've frequently been baffled by posts on here and elsewhere, as I am sure to have baffled others. But that post I think must win some sort of Baffled of the Year award - it just has to!

Prostitution and Surrogacy are the same? - priceless ! 

If you donate your kidney to me are you a prostitute ? After all you've grown that kidney inside you and are now giving it to me to aid my well being. What's the difference? 

The woman has no part to play in the production of the baby apart from blood nutrients and of course the birth, she passes on NO DNA whatsoever. This arrangement suits all especially the childless couple who can experience extreme psychological issues by not being able to conceive. The vitriol here on what for me is an extremely kind thing to do (done right I should stress) is depressing.

[Rookiescot]

6 hours ago, Benroon said:

Wtf ??? 

I would have thought the difference was blindingly obvious or is that a wind up ? 

Here’s your starter for 10 - sex involved in the first one, no sex in the second one amongst numerous others!

In your desperation to be outraged you missed my point. For me prostitution and surrogacy should be legal. 

 

[Benroon]

1 minute ago, Rookiescot said:

In your desperation to be outraged you missed my point. For me prostitution and surrogacy should be legal. 

Couldn't be calmer tbh.

Whilst I couldn't agree more with the above, my point was how you are connecting the two is just baffling. The two components don't cross at any point despite the clumsy 'renting the body' out missive.

 

 

[AdvocatusDiaboli]

12 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

For me prostitution and surrogacy should be legal. 

Well surrogacy is legal in Thailand. So your half way there.

[Rookiescot]

7 minutes ago, Benroon said:

Couldn't be calmer tbh.

Whilst I couldn't agree more with the above, my point was how you are connecting the two is just baffling. The two components don't cross at any point despite the clumsy 'renting the body' out missive.

You dont sound very calm. Most of your posts contain a lot of WTF's, FFS's, exclamation marks and a condescending/dismissive tone.

You understand that the purpose of a forum is to discuss a variety of topics with people who may or may not have a differing view? 

[Dedinbed]

On 2/14/2022 at 10:14 AM, Thaiger said:

, foreigners will also be allowed to bring the eggs

but someone else has to bring the bacon .. as for the jizz , tie a knot in the Johnny after you've made a deposit then put it in the fridge or they'll overheat and shrivel .. 

[Stonker]

3 hours ago, Benroon said:

I've frequently been baffled by posts on here and elsewhere, as I am sure to have baffled others. But that post I think must win some sort of Baffled of the Year award - it just has to!

Sorry if it was beyond you, but I can't really be held responsible for that.

3 hours ago, Benroon said:

Prostitution and Surrogacy are the same? - priceless !

I can't even guess where you got that idea from, but it wasn't me.

What I said, I thought quite clearly but apparently not, was that they were much the same "morally and ethically".

It's similar to @Rookiescot's point, which you've also completely missed.

3 hours ago, Benroon said:

If you donate your kidney to me are you a prostitute ? After all you've grown that kidney inside you and are now giving it to me to aid my well being. What's the difference?

It doesn't "make me a prostitute", but morally and ethically "what's the difference"?

If I give you a kidney, bear or father your child, or have sex with you then as long as they're either all free or all commercial transactions and everyone's happy what's the difference morally or ethically since all are 'to aid your well being'? 

Seriously, what's the moral or ethical difference?

3 hours ago, Benroon said:

The woman has no part to play in the production of the baby apart from blood nutrients and of course the birth, she passes on NO DNA whatsoever. 

Well, I hate to break this to you, but if all goes according to plan a prostitute (male, female, or in-between) "passes on NO DNA whatsoever" either.

3 hours ago, Benroon said:

This arrangement suits all especially the childless couple who can experience extreme psychological issues by not being able to conceive. 

Rather similar morally and ethically to any 'arrangement' made with a prostitute for sex, whether it's because some can't be bothered with the wining and dining bit or  with those who can experience extreme psychological issues by not being able to get some sex .

Seriously, what's the moral difference and where are the most "extreme psychological issues" likely to be found?

With those who can't get any kids or those who can't get any sex?

3 hours ago, Benroon said:

The vitriol here on what for me is an extremely kind thing to do (done right I should stress) is depressing.

The only "vitriol" I've seen here is on your part.

Others have no problem with it, whether it's as "an extremely kind thing to do", for love, or for profit - just as others have no problem with  prostitutes having sex for exactly the same reasons, or with those donating or selling their organs.

[Stonker]

3 hours ago, Benroon said:

The two components don't cross at any point despite the clumsy 'renting the body' out missive.

Well, you may see it as a "clumsy 'renting the body out' missive" but that's exactly what both surrogates and prostitutes are doing in order to make the other person happy.

I don't see anything wrong with that for anyone involved, but apparently you do.

[Stonker]

12 hours ago, Marc26 said:

I don't know if I would call it immoral

And the way you posed it, I don't think you are either??

But thinking about it

It is almost like buying a pure bread dog over adopting

I wouldn't say that is immoral, but there are ample dogs to be adopted 

Agreed on all counts - as long as everyone's happy, I don't see anything wrong with surrogacy, prostitution, organ donation, or any other related activity.

[Benroon]

19 minutes ago, Stonker said:

Sorry if it was beyond you, but I can't really be held responsible for that.

I can't even guess where you got that idea from, but it wasn't me.

What I said, I thought quite clearly but apparently not, was that they were much the same "morally and ethically".

It's similar to @Rookiescot's point, which you've also completely missed.

It doesn't "make me a prostitute", but morally and ethically "what's the difference"?

If I give you a kidney, bear or father your child, or have sex with you then as long as they're either all free or all commercial transactions and everyone's happy what's the difference morally or ethically since all are 'to aid your well being'? 

Seriously, what's the moral or ethical difference?

Well, I hate to break this to you, but if all goes according to plan a prostitute (male, female, or in-between) "passes on NO DNA whatsoever" either.

Rather similar morally and ethically to any 'arrangement' made with a prostitute for sex, whether it's because some can't be bothered with the wining and dining bit or  with those who can experience extreme psychological issues by not being able to get some sex .

Seriously, what's the moral difference and where are the most "extreme psychological issues" likely to be found?

With those who can't get any kids or those who can't get any sex?

The only "vitriol" I've seen here is on your part.

Others have no problem with it, whether it's as "an extremely kind thing to do", for love, or for profit - just as others have no problem with  prostitutes having sex for exactly the same reasons, or with those donating or selling their organs.

Just laughable even for you - using your logic there's no difference between surrogacy and being a welder ! They do it for profit too right? That's how absurd your comparison is.

If you truly believe that a woman who offers a surrogacy to her sister for example to complete their family is operating in life on the same level as a prostitute providing sexual favours you're certifiably nuts ! (I don't even have a problem with prostitution but the two areas don't cross at any point) - everything on the planet is done for free or profit so that's not a consideration.

And its pointless going into the psychological aspects if you're struggling with the basics- that you think there are none is again baffling.  Presumably depression isn't real and you should just pull yourself together right ?

There is absolutely no moral or ethical comparison whatsoever.

[Benroon]

19 minutes ago, Stonker said:

Well, you may see it as a "clumsy 'renting the body out' missive" but that's exactly what both surrogates and prostitutes are doing in order to make the other person happy.

I don't see anything wrong with that for anyone involved, but apparently you do.

I don't either as I've said before - I can understand your need to backtrack from your MORAL comparison but you're getting tangled up.