Posted on 07/24/2025 1:09:25 PM PDT by TigerClaws
Lila Rose @LilaGraceRose · Jul 18, 2023 Two men hired surrogate Brittney Pearson to create their “dream family.”
By the end of the process, a 25-week-old baby boy was murdered.
[Thread] Lila Rose @LilaGraceRose While pregnant, Brittney received a breast cancer diagnosis & decided to deliver the baby early at 25 weeks so she could receive chemo treatment while giving the child a possible chance of survival.
She said her thought was, “I want to keep this baby safe & bring it earthside.” Lila Rose
But the purchasing couple didn’t want to pay Brittney for a baby born before 38 weeks due to the potential health problems of a premature baby.
They demanded the baby be “immediately terminated.”
In California gave no rights to Brittney or the baby.
When Brittney refused to kill the baby, they threatened legal action.
When she offered to adopt the child, they demanded a death certificate.
Brittney has described her experience as a surrogate as feeling like “a rented-out uterus.”
She was able to deliver the baby at 25 weeks, but the purchasing couple had “ownership” of the child after birth.
They ordered that life-saving care be withheld.
The baby boy died shortly after birth.
While it appears Brittney tried to protect this child in the womb, her participation in surrogacy played a partial role in the ultimate death of this little boy.
From his moment of conception, he was stripped of his fundamental rights & treated as a product that could be discarded at the first sign of defect.
Surrogacy is a great wrong. But the circumstances could very well have been the same if the couple who hired the woman were a man and woman or even if the baby was the natural child of a couple.
That is because the two men were the legal parents of the baby and therefore had the right to make medical decisions for the baby. That right also means declining extraordinary treatment/measures when there is very little chance the child will survive.
There is no law or even ethical guideline that mandates a terminal patient be kept alive by any and all means necessary. Palliative care is often an option offered (and that may be required by law) in cases of extreme premature birth. Just leaving a premature baby to die without any sort of “care” is not the same as palliative care. But the fact the baby is likely not going to survive means the parents or even the doctors can’t be compelled to provide extraordinary and often futile measures to prolong life.
There are even cases where a parent’s wishes for such care are overridden by hospital “so called ethics” boards. Even when the futility of such measures is not clear. Hello Texas.
Anyway this did not happen because the couple which hired the woman were homosexuals. Surrogacy is wrong because it treats children as a commodity (well that is one reason). The medical and legal ethics/law in this case though pretty much line up with non-surrogate births of very premature babies.
Remember friends, every bit of this tragedy lay on the shoulders of your elected government. If this doesn’t set right with you then it’s time to get out and vote.
The homos wanted a fashion accessory, and in all likelihood, a sex toy. Once the poor baby became inconvenient they had to eliminate it. And they’ll hire another surrogate and someone else will birth their next victim.
Ummmm, that's cause that's all you were to these evil monsters.
It's one thing to surrogate for a woman who CAN'T carry to term for some reason, but to be used to produce a commodity for a gay couple, is not the same thing.
There is no such thing as surrogate mother. Either you’re a mother or you’re not. Becoming a mother and promising to give up the baby is an abomination.
Not buying the story..you can’t be made to terminate a baby. The mother makes the choice. If she chose to do then it’s on her.
“Not buying the story..you can’t be made to terminate a baby. The mother makes the choice. If she chose to do then it’s on her.”
Once born, it was not hers.
Premature babies, under certain conditions, can be taken off life support.
The men were happy killing the child because it was just a “prop” for their cosplay.
Per the the article two faggots didn’t want the baby, so it’s now hers. Prove me wrong.
The baby was fine
The surrogate mother had breast cancer and needed to deliver early in order to receive treatment which might have harmed the unborn baby
This story makes me sick at heart
“Per the the article two faggots didn’t want the baby, so it’s now hers. Prove me wrong.”
Per the article
Per California law
What happened to my body my choice?
Lessons learned:
1. Be just as selective in who you choose to carry a child for as they are in choosing you.
2. Draft a better surrogacy contract for just such events giving you more power in the event they change their minds, allowing you to adopt (or adopt out) if they choose not to.
They were a poor choice in the first place. Just say no.
This needs to be publicized as widely as possible to scare women into refusing to be surrogates for homos.
“Brittney has described her experience as a surrogate as feeling like “a rented-out uterus.”
Because that’s exactly what you were, you idiot.
L
That poor little baby.
He is in the loving embrace of the One Who loves children Who said “let the little ones come to Me.”
Epic FAFO, and the only innocent party gets killed
FTA: Brittney has described her experience as a surrogate as feeling like “a rented-out uterus.”
“”””””
Well, honey, that’s what you were. And for a pair of pervs, no less.
Lila, please proofread.
Prayers for the baby.
It’s the same spirit.
I believe there is a solution to this somewhere in this...
18 U.S. Code Chapter 77 Part I - PEONAGE, SLAVERY, AND TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS
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.