But imagine if all surrogate mothers could claim custody of children they were carrying for biological parents?
The only true connection is the biological connection. And yes, that holds true even if you use a sperm donor and an egg donor — the child you bear can be yours emotionally, but not physically. The child bears the genes of the biological parents, and to the degree biology makes any difference, that is where the connection lies.
There is a reason that adopted children tend to seek out their biological parents, although we deny it because it doesn’t fit our modern culture — biology matters, we are connected to our biological parents in a way that is not fully understood.
It has happened and the 'birth mother' won...................
I wonder what happens with the birth certificate in those legally contracted surrogate cases. Who is listed as mother? I bet the biological mother and father are listed and that is stipulated in the surrogate contract.
That’s what the issue is here. There was no contract that stipulated which woman’s name was listed, so the one who gave birth to the child was listed and the other woman went along with it. Now she wants to change the rules and be the one listed as mother with full legal custody.
The only true connection is the biological connection?? Not sure what you mean here.
Yes, biology does matter. And that is why open adoptions are so popular now, children deserve to know their heritage. But that in no way negates the adoption connection. Once a parent adopts a child, that child is theirs just THE SAME as a birth child.
Absolutely true. No one seems to be thinking of the child when they make these self-gratifying decisions to create a child where nature could not -- and should not.