The globalization of baby-making

[manu1959]

need some extra cash???????????

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/04/11/opinion/edgoodman.php


Many of the stories about the globalization of baby production begin in India, where the government seems to regard this as, literally, a growth industry. In the little town of Anand, dubbed "The Cradle of the World," 45 women were recently on the books of a local clinic. For the production and delivery of a child, they will earn $5,000 to $7,000, a decade's worth of women's wages in rural India.

But even in America, some women, including Army wives, are supplementing their income by contracting out their wombs. They have become surrogate mothers for wealthy couples from European countries that ban the practice.
Nevertheless, there is - and there should be - something uncomfortable about a free-market approach to baby-making. It's easier to accept surrogacy when it's a gift from one woman to another. But we rarely see a rich woman become a surrogate for a poor family. Indeed, in Third World countries, some women sign these

[jackass]

Honestly, I dont see anything wrong with it. If a couple wants to have a "baby", why shouldnt the surrogate mother make some money for her effort? She needs to take care of herself and needs to walk around for nine months with the baby. Now I am not saying that there should be "baby farms", but if someone is willing to pay, and they pass the background check, why not?

[Pale Rider]

Yeah the world is so VOID of humans already... that's exactly what we need, turn berthing into a business... :uhoh:

[Trigg]

The big problem is women were lied to for 20 yrs.


They were told throughout the 80's that they didn't need a man. They could work a full time job, have a family and life would be perfect.

Feminists insulted full-time moms and even to an extent part-time moms.

Women were told that they could put off having kids until they were ready, just like men. They needed to have a high profile career before having children.

Unfortunately women have come to find out that we weren't meant to have children in our 40's that, in fact, our fertility starts to decrease in our early 30's.

Now these same women are older and desperate to have children and finding that they can't, so they're turning to fertility treatments and surrogacy.


These woman, IMO, arn't farming out their pregnancies because they want to. They're doing it because they put off motherhood until it was too late and are unable to carry a pregnancy to term.

[Yurt]

need some extra cash???????????

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/04/11/opinion/edgoodman.php


Many of the stories about the globalization of baby production begin in India, where the government seems to regard this as, literally, a growth industry. In the little town of Anand, dubbed "The Cradle of the World," 45 women were recently on the books of a local clinic. For the production and delivery of a child, they will earn $5,000 to $7,000, a decade's worth of women's wages in rural India.

But even in America, some women, including Army wives, are supplementing their income by contracting out their wombs. They have become surrogate mothers for wealthy couples from European countries that ban the practice.
Nevertheless, there is - and there should be - something uncomfortable about a free-market approach to baby-making. It's easier to accept surrogacy when it's a gift from one woman to another. But we rarely see a rich woman become a surrogate for a poor family. Indeed, in Third World countries, some women sign these

there is no such thing as a perfect "state" on this planet....

are you saying that you see nothing wrong with this? who controls baby production?

[manu1959]

there is no such thing as a perfect "state" on this planet....

are you saying that you see nothing wrong with this? who controls baby production?

you know i really don't care.......