Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Should this child have been born?
#48
(03-05-2013, 05:18 PM)Duchess Wrote:
(03-05-2013, 05:10 PM)ramseycat Wrote: You have a point. Logically. However, there is nothing logical about a pregnant woman and the attachment she has with the baby she is carrying. Even if its not her own. I imagine having to make a decision such as this to be torture. Add in emotions and hormones and a mothers instinct. I'd like to think that I could put my own desire for a baby aside and only consider what kind of life the baby would have in making the decision.


This ^^^^^^ is based on emotions. It's my feeling that's why there was a contract, a legal obligation. This was a "deal" for which the surrogate was paid. It wasn't her child & I don't feel she had a right to make the decisions that she did, she entered into this willingly and she agreed to the terms of the contract.

A pregnant woman's emotions and hormones make it practically impossible to have a contract. I don't agree with what the surrogate did. But then again I don't know what I would have done in her shoes either. I just know that when I was pregnant there was nothing more important than the baby I was carrying.
Devil Money Stealing Aunt Smiley_emoticons_fies
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Should this child have been born? - by username - 03-05-2013, 12:45 PM
RE: Should this child have been born? - by ramseycat - 03-05-2013, 07:28 PM
RE: Should this child have been born? - by sally - 03-05-2013, 04:59 PM
RE: Should this child have been born? - by sally - 03-05-2013, 05:24 PM