I do not envy the courts in this case. That’s a tough decision. One woman provided the egg, the other provided blood and nourishment and gave birth. I might have sided with the birth mother too. I don’t know.
I think the courts made the best decision, the ‘birth mother’ gets custody, not the ‘donor’. Imagine if all egg donors could now claim custodial rights to children they had provided eggs for..........
Seems simple enough. If we're supposed to believe that "Heahter has two Mommies" then no matter which one gets custody, Heather stays with Mommie.
Human eggs and sperm are soon to be fungible commodities traded on the exchange.
No price too high or ethics too low - for buyers and sellers.
Have we come this far? Yup - this is where we are.
Pray for all those children who have been, and are yet to be ‘produced’.
Actually, there is case law on this point, with surrogate mothers, and the courts have generally found that the biological mother wins over a surrogate mother.
Whether it is different here because the surrogate had not contracted to give up the child or not is a legal matter in and of itself, but the biological question does seem to favor the actual biological parents, not the vessel that carried the baby to term.
This is why they prefer women who donate eggs to already have at least one child of their own so they know what they are doing....