Posted on 01/06/2016 3:50:54 AM PST by NYer
A California surrogate mother filed a lawsuit Monday to protect one of her unborn triplets from being aborted by the biological father.
The New York Post reports that the babies’ biological father is demanding that one of the triplets be aborted because he only wants two of the children. The unnamed Georgia man threatened to not pay surrogate Melissa Cook if she refused to abort one of the babies.
Despite the pressure, Cook refused to abort the third triplet. She was 17-weeks pregnant in November when her story first gained national media attention.
"They are human beings. I bonded with these kids. This is just not right," Cook said in November.
The babies were conceived using the father's sperm and a 20-year-old donor's eggs, LifeNews previously reported. Cook's contract with the biological father would pay her $33,000 for the pregnancy, plus $6,000 for each additional child, the report states.
Her lawsuit claims that California's surrogacy law is unconstitutional, because it violates due-process and equal-protection rights in the U.S. Constitution, according to the Post.
Cook said because of her experience, she does not view surrogacy arrangements as favorably as she once did.
"Children derive a special benefit from their relationship with their mother," Cook said. "I now think that the basic concept of surrogacy arrangements must be re-examined, scrutinized and reconsidered."
The report continues:
Cook's lawsuit claims she is the legal mother of the triplets and seeks custody of at least one who was targeted for abortion. A custody hearing would determine the fate of the other two.
Cook retained lawyer Harold Cassidy, who represented the surrogate mom in the famous Baby M case in New Jersey a generation ago.
"The surrogacy contract in this case and the California Surrogacy Enabling Statute will not withstand constitutional scrutiny," Cassidy said.
"The notion that a man can demand that a mother terminate the life of one of the children she carries by an abortion, and then claim that she is liable for money damages when she refuses, is cruel to the mother," Cassidy said.
He said it's also "cruel to the child" to allow it to be raised by a stranger when Cook wants the baby.
Cook has four of her own children, including a set of triplets, according to reports.
The publicity surrounding Cook’s story prompted another surrogate mother to come forward and seek help for a very similar situation.
The anonymous Southern California surrogate also is pregnant with triplets, LifeNews reported in November. She said one of the parents of her unborn children is pressuring her to abort at least one of them.
After reading about Cook's situation in the news, a friend of the anonymous woman contacted the Center for Bioethics and Culture, a watchdog group for surrogacy exploitation, and asked for legal help to save the unborn triplets, the report states.
"This woman was asked to submit to an abortion. She's asking for legal help," said Jennifer Lahl, director of the center. "That's why Melissa Cook's story was so empowering. When one woman tells her story, it encourages other women to come forward. There's strength in numbers."
Since Cook’s story was published, people have volunteered free legal assistance and even adoption of the third triplet, according to the Post. Others are collecting donations to help her and the babies. The Center for Bioethics and Culture also is helping Cook fight for the lives of all of her unborn triplets.
No circumstance, no purpose, no law whatsoever can ever make licit an act which is intrinsically illicit, since it is contrary to the Law of God which is written in every human heart, knowable by reason itself, and proclaimed by the Church.
Catholic ping!
As prolife as I am, there is so much wrong with this story from the git go!!!
Our world is messed up...(understatement, I know)
Three cheers for the surrogate! And in a better world, the father would be charged with something along the lines of conspiracy to commit murder.
Legally the child is considered property. The only question is whose property.
Roe v Wade reinstituted Dred Scott. Some human lives are the property of others. There’s really no legal way to get around that fact, as this case illustrates.
Three cheers for the surrogate! And in a better world, the father would be charged with something along the lines of conspiracy to commit murder.
**************************************************************************
I agree wholeheartedly. WTF is the matter with the man?
I assume you mean an unborn child, before a certain number of weeks.
But I still think (hope) the surrogate has a legal out. Does her contract with the father specifically say that any children past two can be aborted? If not, the father must pay.
And if the clause is in the contract, I'm rather sure the surrogate will tell the father to keep his money and go to hell.
I keep hearing all this stuff about "my body my choice" from feminists, but they are oddly quiet when this man orders a woman to murder a child she's carrying.
What a loving parent and great role model.So what does the father tell the surviving twins when they get older? >>>>>>> You two used to have another sibling but I decided to kill it. >>>>
Consider, among other things, the effect this would have on the surviving children if the father gets his way.
One sibling is killed. Which one? And the other two will know (eventually) that the aborted child was killed for convenience only. It just as easily could have been one of them instead.
Indeed. A man who is so willing to order the murder of one of his children can’t ever be a good father.
I’d be willing to bet the man is homosexual
Yes. Just deliver the babies without notifying anyone until after it's all done.
This type of situation is such a freak show that I can't even take it seriously.
Perhaps this will shed some light on the mindset.
The View Host Joy Behar - I'd Vote for a Rapist as Long as He Votes for Abortion
Finally men get a say in the decision to abort their children
But only if they want the abortion, apparently
“Dad” is probably gay.
“I keep hearing all this stuff about “my body my choice” from feminists, but they are oddly quiet when this man orders a woman to murder a child she’s carrying.”
Yes. Exactly.
What happens if the man “wins”?
Do they strap the woman down against her will... and kill the unlucky third baby?
He is hoping she will kill the child rather than be financially destroyed by him.
My first thought too.....therefore my response.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.